qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH qemu] qmp: Add qom-list-properties to list Q


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH qemu] qmp: Add qom-list-properties to list QOM object properties
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 18:22:19 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)

Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> writes:

> On 23/01/18 23:49, David Gibson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 22:20 +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>>>>> David, I know you're busy with linux.conf.au, but it would be
>>>>> really helpful if you could carve out five minutes to look over
>>>>> Alexey's proposal again, with my reply above in mind, and let us
>>>>> know whether it looks a reasonable design. Doesn't have to be a
>>>>> review, just a quick feedback on the high-level idea.
>>>>
>>>> It looks ok, I think, but I don't think I'm really the right person to
>>>> ask.  I do wonder if creating a throwaway instance could cause
>>>> trouble, especially for something like machine that might well have
>>>> gotten away with having global side-effects in the past.  I think we
>>>> need to talk with someone who knows more about qom and qapi - Markus
>>>> seems the obvious choice.
>>>
>>> Good point. CC'ing Markus to try and grab his attention :)
>> 
>> It's also occurred to me that making a spapr specific approach to this
>> might not be quite as horrible as I initially thought.  The
>> capabilities table is global (and immutable) so coding up a
>> "get-spapr-caps" qapi entry point which encodes the stuff there into
>> json giving the names and allowed values of each cap would be fairly
>> straightforward.
>> 
>> Accurately retreiving default values would be trickier, not sure if
>> that's important or not.
>
>
>
> So, do we want to push it further? Markus has not reacted, added Paolo.
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/863325/

I now have.  Sorry for the long delay.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]