On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 04:18:57PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 02/27/2017 12:58 PM, Jeff Cody wrote: > > This adds all the currently supported runtime opts, which > > are the options as parsed from the filename. All of these > > options are explicitly checked for during during runtime, > > with an exception to the "keyvalue-pairs" option. > > > > This option contains all the key/value pairs that the QEMU rbd > > driver merely unescapes, and passes along blindly to rados. > > Maybe worth adding a comment that keyvalue-pairs will NOT be exposed in > QAPI in the later patches, making it command-line only and > non-introspectible. >
Yes, I will do that. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Cody <[email protected]> > > --- > > block/rbd.c | 62 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > +static QemuOptsList runtime_opts = { > > + .name = "rbd", > > + .head = QTAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(runtime_opts.head), > > + .desc = { > > + { > > + .name = "filename", > > + .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, > > + .help = "Specification of the rbd image", > > + }, > > + { > > + .name = "password-secret", > > + .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, > > + .help = "ID of secret providing the password", > > + }, > > + { > > + .name = "conf", > > Is "conf" the best name, or do we want "configuration"? > I chose "conf" because it matches the rados option name (and the command line option name; it is of the form "conf=filename"). > > + .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, > > + }, > > Worth documenting all the options? > Yes, probably so - and especially to map them up with what rados/ceph options they correspond to. > I'm not seeing where "keyvalue-pairs" is used yet, but assume it is in a > later patch. But assuming the QAPI version in a later patch matches, > other than keyvalue-pairs, I think you're okay. > Yep, the next patch (where we switch over to .bdrv_parse_filename()). > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <[email protected]> > Thanks! -Jeff
