On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 17:36:27 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On a Thursday in 2025, Peter Krempa via Devel wrote:
> > From: Peter Krempa <pkre...@redhat.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkre...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > NEWS.rst | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst
> > index 98ca838642..b2f3415001 100644
> > --- a/NEWS.rst
> > +++ b/NEWS.rst
> > @@ -37,6 +37,16 @@ v11.2.0 (unreleased)
> >
> > * **Improvements**
> >
> > + * qemu: Improved guest agent corner case error reporting
> > +
> > + The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes
> > aimed at
> > + helping management applications and also users to differentiate between
> > + the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting
> > synchronisation, thus
> > + no harm would be done and while being issued a command.
> > +
>
> guest-agent considered harmful? :)
Well, it can be sub-optimal to the VM if the filesystems are frozen
while the management layer thinks they are not.
But I agree that "harm" is not the correct word here.
>
> Also, there's an extra 'and'
>
> How about?
>
> the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting synchronisation.
> These
> mean that the command was not executed so no change to the guest
> happened.
>
> Or just replace harm with change and and remove the extra and.
So I wanted to outline the two cases:
1) timeout while syncing
2) timeout when an actual command was sent but we've timed out
So how about:
The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes aimed at
helping management applications/users to differentiate between
timeout while libvirt was synchronizing with the guest agent and
timeout after a command was already sent.
