On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 01:15:08PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 25.04.2023 um 22:08 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 07:31:42PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > This QMP handler runs in a coroutine, so it must use the corresponding > > > no_co_wrappers instead. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > blockdev.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c > > > index d7b5c18f0a..eb509cf964 100644 > > > --- a/blockdev.c > > > +++ b/blockdev.c > > > @@ -2430,7 +2430,7 @@ void coroutine_fn qmp_block_resize(const char > > > *device, const char *node_name, > > > > Would it help matters to add another patch that changes the name of > > the function to qmp_co_block_resize? > > I'm not opposed to it, but you would have to change the QAPI generator > for that. Currently, it always calls qmp_$COMMAND_NAME() no matter > whether it is coroutine command handler or not.
Oh, that indeed is a bigger task, not worth holding up this series for. But the QAPI generater DOES have the 'coroutine':true information available, if we wanted to automate that. Having a naming convention that reflects usage patterns is helpful during code reviews. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
