From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38434) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbMiz-0008LY-56 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 01:54:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbMiv-0000hf-4P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 01:54:45 -0400 From: Alberto Garcia In-Reply-To: <55F31075.7090101@redhat.com> References: <1be64a26c9a89ff0af4c2b1299d6c8b58361644a.1441890725.git.berto@igalia.com> <55F30DA8.4070502@redhat.com> <20150911172854.GC5164@noname.redhat.com> <55F31075.7090101@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 07:54:02 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/4] block: Add 'ignore-backing' field to BlockdevOptionsGenericCOWFormat List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz , Kevin Wolf Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org On Fri 11 Sep 2015 07:33:41 PM CEST, Max Reitz wrote: >>> So why do we need the new flag? Because "backing: ''" is ugly? >> >> I guess it's just because you're the only one who actually reads the >> documentation. When discussing this, I didn't remember that we >> already had a way to express this (an additional bool wouldn't have >> been my favourite solution anyway). Thanks for catching this. > > I read the patch, it was part of the context. ;-) Oh, that was embarrassing :-) Yes, it was the discussion from two weeks ago about passing empty strings as BlockdevRef that made me think that this would be ugly. Anyway, was this ever implemented? It seems that passing a string to the 'backing' parameter is only specified in the JSON schema, but no one actually uses that. So I'll implement that for the next version of my series. Berto