From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45083) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UjqXR-00060G-8H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 08:40:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UjqXM-00048D-Dr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 08:40:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37054) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UjqXM-000487-6F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 08:40:28 -0400 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r54CeRSV005035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 08:40:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 08:40:25 -0400 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20130604084025.3fcf1a70@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130604100823.GE2642@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1369754856-30036-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <1369754856-30036-17-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <51A4D63B.3040103@redhat.com> <20130529081341.GB3521@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <20130529135101.00122598@redhat.com> <20130604100823.GE2642@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 16/16] Make qemu-io commands available in the monitor List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com On Tue, 4 Jun 2013 12:08:23 +0200 Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 29.05.2013 um 19:51 hat Luiz Capitulino geschrieben: > > On Wed, 29 May 2013 10:13:42 +0200 > > Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > > > Am 28.05.2013 um 18:07 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > > > > On 05/28/2013 09:27 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > > > The QMP version is flagged with a __org.qemu.debug- prefix in order to > > > > > reinforce the statement that qemu-io is for testing and debugging only, > > > > > with no API guarantees. > > > > > > > > Correct use of naming conventions. > > > > > > > > Hmm, I wonder if the recent addition of an 'abort' action to > > > > 'transaction' should be renamed __org.qemu.debug-abort, to make it > > > > obvious that it is another case of a QMP command useful mainly for > > > > testing, and not real-life use. > > > > > > Makes sense to me. > > > > > > But first I'd like to get Luiz's ack for this, because I think I'm the > > > first one to use an __org.qemu prefix, and I'm the first one trying to > > > introduce a QMP command without API stability. > > > > I think that should be fine. However, it's not a perfect match for QMP > > as you don't expect mngt to use it anytime soon and that the command's > > syntax is not QMP friendly: > > > > > { "execute": "__org.qemu.debug-qemu-io-command", "arguments": > > > { "device": "ide0-hd0", "command": "write -P 0x12 4M 512k" } } > > > > What about adding a HMP-only command (the good old way) and use it > > through human-monitor-command? > > > > IMO, this matches better your current use-case and the API instability > > of the command. > > Works for me, but wasn't the plan to make HMP purely a wrapper around > QMP? Then adding HMP-only commands would be counterproductive. So I > assumed that QMP is a must. I didn't even know that the code still > allows you to have HMP-only commands. :-) Yes, the long term plan is to have all HMP commands calling QMP counterparts. But the command you're adding doesn't fit QMP's design very well. I suggested adding it as HMP-only for now because it's the simplest thing to do for this very specific case. If more test-only non-QMP-friendly commands appear, then we'll need to think of a more general solution. Now, something has just occurred to me. Why isn't it a good idea having this command as a stable API? Wouldn't it be a good idea to allow out-of-tree test tools like autotest to use it? > So you prefer a respin with the QMP part dropped? Yes.