[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/4][RFC] Add module infrastructure to QEMU

[Paul Brook]

On Monday 11 May 2009, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> This is the current state of a patch set to introduce a module
> infrastructure to QEMU.

I don't think numeric priorities are a good idea. If we have dependencies then 
we should be dealing with them properly, not hacking round the problem.

Also, there's no reason to have destructors. The init function can register 
these at runtime.

>  2) Switch to using dynamic shared libraries.  This has the benefit of
> reducing the QEMU install size.  This is attractive except for the fact
> that creating dynamic shared libraries across multiple host architectures
> is a pain.

In practice I'd expect the shared library overhead (both disk and RAM) to be 
significantly larger than the saving form omitting a few devices. As you said 
before, if we're not using something, why build it in the first place?

There's also the issue that shared libraries imply it's OK for third parties 
to ship binary plugins.

Paul