[PATCH v2 4/8] Cleanup diskSourceNetwork and diskSourceFile schema

[Rohit Kumar]

On 21/04/22 8:29 pm, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 10:48:47 -0700, Rohit Kumar wrote:
>> Moving diskSourceNetwork and diskSourceFile's Source definition
>> under 'define' element, so that it will be easier to reuse it
>> at multiple places.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Prerna Saxena <prerna.saxena at nutanix.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Florian Schmidt <flosch at nutanix.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Kumar <rohit.kumar3 at nutanix.com>
>> ---
>>   src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng | 60 +++++++++++++++++--------------
>>   1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng b/src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng
>> index c0c14fe558..58eb9670d4 100644
>> --- a/src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng
>> +++ b/src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng
> While this commit is correct I don't think you will benefit too much
> with having it.
Agreed.
>
>> @@ -1724,6 +1724,31 @@
>>       </choice>
>>     </define>
>>   
>> +  <define name="diskSourceFileElement">
>> +    <element name="source">
>> +      <interleave>
>> +        <optional>
>> +          <attribute name="file">
>> +            <choice>
>> +                <ref name="absFilePath"/>
>> +                <ref name="vmwarePath"/>
> This IMO won't make sense for nvram.
Ack. I will remove it.
>
>> +            </choice>
>> +          </attribute>
>> +        </optional>
>> +        <ref name="diskSourceCommon"/>
>> +        <optional>
>> +          <ref name="storageStartupPolicy"/>
>> +        </optional>
> Startup policy definitely makes no sense for the nvram.
Should this be removed after parsing as well, If we are not mentioning 
these in schema defination ?
Should we report error if user provides startup policy, encryption or 
security labels  ?
>
>> +        <optional>
>> +          <ref name="encryption"/>
> Due to the way how the 'pflash1' storage source is initialized
> encryption is NOT yet supported.
>
> You'll also need to reject it after parsing.
Right. I did not understand what does rejecting it meaning here. Is it 
reporting error like encryption is not supported ? or is it just 
deallocating 'Auth' field from virStorageSource after parsing ?
>
>> +        </optional>
>> +        <zeroOrMore>
>> +          <ref name="devSeclabel"/>
> I don't think the code is wired up to actually handle seclabels even if
> the parser parses them.
Right. I will remove it from schema defination. Thanks!
>
>> +        </zeroOrMore>
>> +      </interleave>
>> +    </element>
>> +  </define>
>> +
>>     <define name="diskSourceFile">
>>       <optional>
>>         <attribute name="type">