[libvirt] [PATCH libvirt 1/6] conf: add MTP filesystem support to the parser
Daniel P. Berrange
berrange at redhat.com
Mon Aug 11 10:24:48 UTC 2014
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:15:41PM +0200, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
> "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange at redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 04:10:31PM +0200, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan at redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >> src/conf/domain_conf.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> >> src/conf/domain_conf.h | 1 +
> >> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> >> index c25c74b..3bdf46a 100644
> >> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> >> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> >> @@ -342,7 +342,8 @@ VIR_ENUM_IMPL(virDomainFS, VIR_DOMAIN_FS_TYPE_LAST,
> >> "file",
> >> "template",
> >> "ram",
> >> - "bind")
> >> + "bind",
> >> + "mtp")
> >
> > I don't think this is the right way to represent it.
> >
> > The 'type' attribute on <filesystem> represents where the backing store
> > for the filesystem comes from.
> >
> > The distinction of 9p vs mtp reflects the type of guest device to expose
> > it as.
> >
> > We shouldn't try to overload these two concepts in the same attribute.
> > We should instead try to add a <device> or <model> child element as we
> > have for some other device types.
>
> I see, thanks for the clarification.
>
> Would you agree with something like this?
>
> <filesystem type='mount'>
> <device name="mtp share">mtp</device>
> ...
What is the name="mtp share" bit trying to reflect ?
It seems we're mostly biased towards <model> so I think we should aim
for <model type='mtp|9p'/>
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list