On 06/14/2012 01:35 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina<address@hidden>
---
+++ b/qapi-schema.json
@@ -1169,6 +1169,21 @@
{ 'command': 'block_resize', 'data': { 'device': 'str', 'size': 'int' }}
##
+# @commit
+#
+# Commit changes to the disk images (if -snapshot is used) or backing files.
+#
+# @device: the name of the device or the "all" to commit all devices
+#
+# Returns: nothing on success
+# If @device is not a valid block device, DeviceNotFound
+# If a long-running operation is using the device, DeviceInUse
+#
+# Since: 1.2
+##
+{ 'command': 'commit', 'data': { 'device': 'str' }}
Should we use this as an opportunity to make the command more powerful?
For example, integrating this with the 'transaction' command or a block
job queried by 'query-block-jobs' to track its progress would be useful.
Also, suppose I have A<- B<- C. Does 'commit' only do one layer (C
into B), or all layers (B and C into A)? That argues that we need an
optional parameter that says how deep to commit (committing C into B
only to repeat and commit B into A is more time-consuming than directly
committing both B and C into A to start with). When a commit is
complete, which file is backing the device - is it still C (which
continues to diverge, but now from the point of the commit) or does qemu
pivot things to have the device now backed by B (and C can be discarded,
particularly true if changes are now going into B which invalidate C).