|
From: | Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] Initial support for machine creation via QMP |
Date: | Fri, 21 May 2021 19:02:25 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 |
On 21/05/21 13:32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
PHASE_NO_MACHINE -> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED -> -> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED -> -> finish-machine-init -> PHASE_MACHINE_READY -> cont Is machine-set one big command, or a sequence of commands, where each command configures just one thing? Same for accel-set.
They would be almost 1:1 mappings with -M and -accel. If we add a third command for the CPU model, machine-set and accel-set would be basically as big as device_add or object-add.
So the full flow would be PHASE_NO_MACHINE -> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED -> -> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> -> cpu-model-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED -> -> device_add... -> finish-machine-init -> PHASE_MACHINE_READY -> cont
Permit me to go off on a tangent: how much and what kind of magic do we want in the initialization sequence?
No magic at all, because the QMP configuration would be entirely -nodefaults. Default devices, for boards that need them, can be created by setting properties such as serial0, netdev0 in machine-set (and in no other way).
Paolo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |