[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v15 10/11] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: CPU_POLARITY_CHANGE qapi
From: |
Markus Armbruster |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v15 10/11] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: CPU_POLARITY_CHANGE qapi event |
Date: |
Thu, 09 Feb 2023 12:01:16 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) |
Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 06:35:39PM +0100, Nina Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
[...]
>> I also wonder if you should add 'feature' : [ 'unstable' ].
>> On the upside, it would mark the event as unstable, but I don't know what the
>> consequences are exactly.
>
> The intention of this flag is to allow mgmt apps to make a usage policy
> decision.
>
> Libvirt's policy is that we'll never use features marked unstable.
>
> IOW, the consequence of marking it unstable is that it'll likely
> go unused until the unstable marker gets removed.
>
> Using 'unstable' is useful if you want to get complex code merged
> before you're quite happy with the design, and then iterate on the
> impl in-tree. This is OK if there's no urgent need for apps to
> consume the feature. If you want the feature to be used for real
> though, the unstable flag is not desirable and you need to finalize
> the design.
Another use of 'unstable' is debugging aids. Making these stable can be
plenty of pain for precious little gain.
[...]
[PATCH v15 07/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: activating CPU topology, Pierre Morel, 2023/02/01
[PATCH v15 06/11] s390x/cpu topology: interception of PTF instruction, Pierre Morel, 2023/02/01