Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: > Am 11.10.2019 um 08:08 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: >> Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Am 02.10.2019 um 13:57 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: [...] >> >> So the problem is certain (common & sane) -blockdev use makes savevm >> >> create additional, unwanted snapshots. >> > >> > Actually, the most common protocol driver is file-posix, which doesn't >> > support snapshots, so usually the result was that savevm just fails >> > because it can't snapshot something that it (incorrectly) thinks it >> > should snapshot. >> >> v3's commit message: >> >> qapi: Allow introspecting fix for savevm's cooperation with blockdev >> >> 'savevm' was buggy as it considered all monitor-owned block device nodes >> for snapshot. With introduction of -blockdev the common usage made all >> nodes including protocol and backing file nodes monitor-owned and thus >> considered for snapshot. >> >> This is a problem since the 'file' protocol nodes can't have internal >> snapshots and it does not make sense to take snapshot of nodes >> representing backing files. >> >> This was fixed by commit 05f4aced658a02b02 clients need to be able to >> detect whether this fix is present. > > Something is missing in this sentence. I think you lost the "but" from > the original message.
I fixed this in v4 by inserting a period. I wasn't aware we had lost a "but". >> Since savevm does not have an QMP alternative, add the feature for the >> 'human-monitor-command' backdoor which is used to call this command in >> modern use. >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkre...@redhat.com> >> >> Kevin, is this explanation sufficiently correct & complete? > > Looks good to me otherwise. Thanks!