On 10/27/2016 03:58 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>>> -# @backing-file: #optional The backing file string to write into the >>>> active >>>> -# layer. This filename is not validated. >>>> +# @backing-file: #optional The backing file string to write into the top >>>> +# image. This filename is not validated. >>>> # >>>> # If a pathname string is such that it cannot be >>>> # resolved by QEMU, that means that subsequent >>>> QMP or >>> >>> As we discussed in v10, this is not discoverable through >>> introspection. You added patch 18 which introduces a base-node option >>> and can serve as a witness for the changed semantics, which is >>> good. Should this be documented here? >> >> In the commit message I don't see why not, but in the JSON file? >> >> "This feature was added together with the base-node parameter" ? > > Eric may have a better suggestion for the wording, but maybe something > like this: > > "Presence of this feature can't directly be tested with introspection; > check for the presence of base-node instead as a witness for it."
The sentence on checking for the feature should go earlier, with this paragraph. Maybe as follows: # The node that receives the data is called the top image, and can be # located in any part of the chain (but always above the base image; # see below) and can be specified using its device or node name. # Earlier qemu versions only allowed 'device' to name the top level # node; presence of the 'base-node' parameter during introspection can # be used as a witness of the enhanced semantics of 'device'. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
