On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:24:21 +0200 Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:14:09 +0200 > Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:20:56 +0300 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 07:46:03PM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > This introduces an Error object based implementation of virtio_error(). > > > > It > > > > allows to implement virtio_error() wrappers in device-specific code. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> > > > > --- > > > > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- > > > > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 1 + > > > > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > Also, whether to stop the device, or the VM, or just warn, > > > seems like a policy decision. Why not set it on command line > > > like we do for other storage? > > > > > > > Huh? This patch simply introduces a new API to a feature that underwent > > several rounds of discussion and reached a reasonable consensus (even > > your R-b). > > > > I'm not sure this 9pfs series is the right place to talk about all the > > behavior changes you're suggesting for virtio_error()... I'd rather > > drop this patch and duplicate code in virtio-9p instead if I want the > > fixes to go to 2.9. > > I agree that we should discuss this outside of this patch series. It's > not like it is introducing a new error case. > > > > > Cc'ing Connie and Stefanha for insights. > > See my reply to Michael's mail. > Yeah, I saw that just after pressing the send button :) The points raised by Michael make a lot of sense anyway. Maybe we can discuss them for 2.10 ? Cheers. -- Greg
pgpfUfw6DAT11.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
