Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 2/6] Use machine options to emulate -no-kvm-irqchip

[Anthony Liguori]

Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> writes:

> On 2012-10-03 19:16, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> On 2012-10-03 17:03, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:40:17AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>> Marcelo Tosatti <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Commit 3ad763fcba5bd0ec5a79d4a9b6baeef119dd4a3d from qemu-kvm.git.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Jan Kiszka <address@hidden>
>>>>>>     
>>>>>> Upstream is moving towards this mechanism, so start using it in qemu-kvm
>>>>>> already to configure the specific defaults: kvm enabled on, just like
>>>>>> in-kernel irqchips.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <address@hidden>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Anthony Liguori <address@hidden>
>>>>>
>>>>> Although it's a little odd to have From: Jan without a SoB...
>>>>
>>>> Agree, Jan can you ACK?
>>>
>>> I wasn't able to join the call yesterday: Is there a removal schedule
>>> associated with those switches? Also, why pushing things upstream, even
>>> when only for one release, that have been loudly deprecated for a while
>>> in qemu-kvm? Some switches are lacking deprecated warnings on the
>>> console, and -no-kvm is missing completely. I tend to focus on patch 1 &
>>> 5, dropping the rest - based on relevance for production use.
>> 
>> The distros need to keep these flags to do the switch.
>
> Why? Should be documented in commit log.
>
>>  I see no point
>> in deprecating them since they're trivially easy to maintain.
>
> Given the level of cr** we already have in the command line, they are
> kind of noise, yes. But even then, these patches are not consistent as
> pointed out above.
>
> Also, they should not be documented to avoid being spread. That's what
> we did with other deprecated switches in QEMU.

The patchset isn't checkpatch clean so I'll fix that, remove the docs,
and send a new version tomorrow along with the machine changes.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Jan