|
From: | Anthony Liguori |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] move 'unsafe' to end of caching modes in help |
Date: | Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:19:47 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100528 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.5 |
On 07/22/2010 03:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 06:39:32PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:On 07/21/2010 04:58 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:Yes there is. Use the version number.The version number is not suitable, because features can be removed at compile time and/orI don't see any features that libvirt would need to know about that are disabled at compile time that aren't disabled by platform features (i.e. being on a Linux vs. Windows host)SDL.
libvirt executes qemu from a daemon, how does SDL come into play? Why do you need to probe whether it's supported anyway? If a user requests SDL (I assume through /session) if it fails it fails. Doesn't seem like a huge loss to me comparatively speaking.
vhost-net.
vhost-net is unconditionally displayed in the help output regardless of whether the binary supports it.
You cannot assume that qemu supports vhost-net just because it says something in the help output.
added via patch backports.If a distro backports a feature, it should change the QEMU version string. If it doesn't, that's a distro problem.This puts you in the position of having to maintain an ever changing giant compatability table between version numbers and features, which just results in madness.
Or working with QEMU to have a better solution.We've been complaining for a long time about parsing help output and we've made changes as "temporary" stop gaps for libvirt too many times in the past.
This problem needs to get fixed properly.
The only reliable way is to query the QEMU binary to ask it what it actually supports.And you do that by asking QEMU what it's version number is. If the version number isn't reliable because a distro backported features without changing it, then the distro is broken. It's no different than if we had a capabilities system and a distro added a feature without adjusting the advertises capabilities.Using version numbers simply isn't scalable / sustainable in the long term.
And parsing help output is?I'm not claiming that version numbers is a long term solution. But it's a better interim solution than parsing help output.
It's time to fix this problem properly. There's been plenty of feedback that relying on help output isn't acceptable.
Regards, Anthony Liguori
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |