qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] qapi: fix example of BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED event


From: Victor Toso
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] qapi: fix example of BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED event
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:06:35 +0200

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:54:41AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Victor Toso <victortoso@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Fatal is not optional.
> 
> Recognizing that "Fatal" refers to member "fatal" takes mental
> effort.  Always use identifiers verbatim, including case.
> Where that makes for confusing prose, prefix with a @ like
> @fatal, or rephrase, like "The
> member fatal".

That's true.

> >
> > Signed-off-by: Victor Toso <victortoso@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  qapi/block-core.json | 7 +++----
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/qapi/block-core.json b/qapi/block-core.json
> > index e89f2dfb5b..63c30a5378 100644
> > --- a/qapi/block-core.json
> > +++ b/qapi/block-core.json
> > @@ -5006,10 +5006,9 @@
> >  # Example:
> >  #
> >  # <- { "event": "BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED",
> > -#      "data": { "device": "ide0-hd0", "node-name": "node0",
> > -#                "msg": "Prevented active L1 table overwrite", "offset": 
> > 196608,
> > -#                "size": 65536 },
> > -#      "timestamp": { "seconds": 1378126126, "microseconds": 966463 } }
> > +#      "data": { "device": "", "node-name": "drive", "fatal": false,
> > +#                "msg": "L2 table offset 0x2a2a2a00 unaligned (L1 index: 
> > 0)" },
> > +#      "timestamp": { "seconds": 1648243240, "microseconds": 906060 } }
> >  #
> >  # Since: 1.7
> >  ##
> 
> Changing the value of @msg makes sense, but is worth a note in the
> commit message.
> 
> Here's my try:
> 
>     qapi: fix example of BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED event
> 
>     Example output lacks mandatory member @fatal.  Provide it.
> 
>     Example output shows a value of @msg no version of the code
>     produces.  No big deal, but replace it anyway by one that today's
>     code does produce.
> 
> How do you like it?

I agree. I'll be more careful in near future. Thanks for the
suggestion. I've submit a v2.1 of this patch.

Cheers,
Victor

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]