From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: "Elena Ufimtseva" <elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com>,
"John Johnson" <john.g.johnson@oracle.com>,
"thuth@redhat.com" <thuth@redhat.com>,
pkrempa@redhat.com, "Jag Raman" <jag.raman@oracle.com>,
"swapnil.ingle@nutanix.com" <swapnil.ingle@nutanix.com>,
"john.levon@nutanix.com" <john.levon@nutanix.com>,
"alex.bennee@linaro.org" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@gmail.com>,
"Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
"thanos.makatos@nutanix.com" <thanos.makatos@nutanix.com>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"philmd@redhat.com" <philmd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] vfio-user: define vfio-user-server object
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2021 07:34:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fss9vlla.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YYUvZjg0lmaWE223@redhat.com> (Kevin Wolf's message of "Fri, 5 Nov 2021 14:19:34 +0100")
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> writes:
> Am 05.11.2021 um 11:08 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > Am 04.11.2021 um 13:13 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> >> The old syntax almost always has its quirks. Ideally, we'd somehow get
>> >> from quirky old to boring new in an orderly manner. Sadly, we still
>> >> don't have good solutions for that. To make progress, we commonly
>> >> combine JSON new with quirky old.
>> >>
>> >> qemu-system-FOO -object works that way. object_option_parse() parses
>> >> either JSON or QemuOpts. It wraps the former in a QObject visitor, and
>> >> the latter in an opts visitor.
>> >>
>> >> QemuOpts is flat by design[*], so the opts visitor parses flat QemuOpts
>> >> from a (possibly non-flat) QAPI type. How exactly it flattens, and how
>> >> it handles clashes I don't remember.
>> >>
>> >> Sadly, this means that we get quirky old even for new object types.
>> >
>> > For -object in the system emulator (the tools all use the keyval
>> > visitor, so there it would work as expected), the only reason that we
>> > need to keep the quirky old code path around is the list handling in
>> > memory-backend.host-nodes.
>> >
>> > The main difficulty there is that the old QemuOpts based code path
>> > allows specifying the option twice and both of them would effectively be
>> > combined. Do we have any idea how to replicate this in a keyval parser
>> > based world?
>>
>> I can see just two clean solutions, but both involve upending a lot of
>> code.
>>
>> We can fuse keyval parser and visitor to get a schema-directed parser.
>>
>> We can change the abstract keyval syntax to permit repeated keys. This
>> means replacing QDict in in the abstract syntax tree, with fallout in
>> the visitor.
>>
>> Even if we find a practical solution, I don't like the combination of
>> "you may give the same parameter multiple times, and the last one wins"
>> and "for a list-valued parameter, the values of repeated parameters are
>> collected into a list". Each makes sense on its own. The combination
>> not so much. Inheriting "last one wins" from QemuOpts may have been a
>> mistake.
>>
>> The keyval way of doing lists (inherited from the block layer's usage of
>> dotted keys? I don't remember) requires the user to count, which isn't
>> exactly nice, either.
>
> Yes. If we didn't have to maintain compatibility (or actually as soon as
> we degrade non-JSON option lists to HMP-level support), I would
> introduce [] and {} syntax for lists and dicts, even if that means that
> use of these characters in strings doesn't work any more or only in a
> limited way. I think this would be the best compromise for usability.
>
> Anyway, this doesn't help us with the compatibility problem we're
> discussing here.
>
>> > If not, do we want to use the remaining time until 6.2 to deprecate
>> > this? The nasty part is that the only syntax that works both now and in
>> > the future is JSON. We can't easily accept the new keyval syntax while
>> > still using the QemuOpts based code.
>>
>> What exactly do you propose to deprecate?
>
> We can deprecate on two different levels. I think it's useful to do
> both:
>
> 1. Broad deprecation: Stable non-JSON interfaces are degraded to
> a HMP-like compatibility promise.
Calling it "deprecation" might be confusing. HMP isn't deprecated, it's
merely not a stable interface. That's kind of like "deprecated when you
need stable", but saying "not a stable interface" is clearer.
When I write "deprecate" below, I mean something like "go use something
else (no conditions)". When I mean "use something else when you need
stable", I write "degrade" (short for "degrade to an HMP-like
compatibility promise").
> Obviously, this can only be done
> for options that support JSON.
We can also degrade or even deprecate sugar options in favor of the real
ones. Case by case, I guess.
> Peter Maydell also wants to do this
> only after a big user (read: libvirt) has implemented and is
> using JSON, basically as a proof that the alternative is working.
>
> So this can certainly be done for -object. I believe libvirt also
> uses JSON for -device now, so this should be fine now, too.
The non-sugar options supporting JSON are -audiodev, -blockdev, -compat,
-display (partially), -machine (I think), -object.
-netdev is QAPIfied, but still uses QemuOpts. Too late for 6.2, I'm
afraid.
> Possibly
> -drive (in favour of -blockdev), though I'm not completely sure if we
> have gotten rid of the final users of -drive. (CCing Peter Krempa for
> details.)
The problem with deprecating -drive is configuring onboard block
devices. We need a stable interface for that, and it must be usable
together with -blockdev.
We provided such an interface (machine properties) for some onboard
block devices starting with commit ebc29e1bea "pc: Support firmware
configuration with -blockdev". Many more remain, I believe.
> This degradation of the compatibility promise doesn't tell users what
> exactly is going to change, which is why doing the second one, too,
> might be nice.
>
> 2. Narrow deprecation: We can just deprecate the non-JSON form, or
> certain aspects of it, of memory-backend.host-nodes. This is the
> specific things that stops us from switching -object to keyval.
>
> a. Deprecate the whole option. If you want to use it and need a
> stable interface, you have to use JSON. We'll just switch the
> non-JSON form on a flag day. Before it, you need to use QemuOpts +
> OptsVisitor syntax for the list; after it, you need to use keyval
> syntax.
I parse "the whole option" as "-object with dotted keys argument".
Correct?
> b. Deprecate only repeating the option. memory-backend is changed to
> first try visiting a list, and if that fails, it visits a string
> and goes through a string visitor locally to keep supporting the
> integer range syntax.
Possible problem: integer range syntax must not leak into the JSON form.
> c. Deprecate all list values, but keep supporting a single integer
> value by using an alternate between list and int.
Single int should also not leak into JSON.
> Picking one of these four options is enough to convert -object to
> keyval. I would suggest doing both 1. and one of the options in 2.
I'm grateful for your analysis.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-06 6:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-11 5:31 [PATCH v3 00/12] vfio-user server in QEMU Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 01/12] configure, meson: override C compiler for cmake Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-12 10:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 02/12] vfio-user: build library Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 15:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-29 14:17 ` Jag Raman
2021-11-01 9:56 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 03/12] vfio-user: define vfio-user-server object Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 15:40 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-29 14:42 ` Jag Raman
2021-11-01 10:34 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-11-04 12:13 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-04 14:39 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-11-05 10:08 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-05 13:19 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-11-05 13:54 ` Peter Krempa
2021-11-06 6:34 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2021-11-08 12:05 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-11-08 12:54 ` Peter Krempa
2021-11-04 16:48 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 04/12] vfio-user: instantiate vfio-user context Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 15:59 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-29 14:59 ` Jag Raman
2021-11-01 10:35 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 05/12] vfio-user: find and init PCI device Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 16:05 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-29 15:58 ` Jag Raman
2021-11-01 10:38 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 06/12] vfio-user: run vfio-user context Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 16:21 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-28 21:55 ` John Levon
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 07/12] vfio-user: handle PCI config space accesses Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 16:35 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 08/12] vfio-user: handle DMA mappings Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 09/12] vfio-user: handle PCI BAR accesses Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 16:38 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] vfio-user: handle device interrupts Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] vfio-user: register handlers to facilitate migration Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-27 18:30 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-12-15 15:49 ` Jag Raman
2021-10-11 5:31 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] vfio-user: acceptance test Jagannathan Raman
2021-10-11 22:26 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-27 16:42 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-27 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 00/12] vfio-user server in QEMU Stefan Hajnoczi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87fss9vlla.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com \
--cc=jag.raman@oracle.com \
--cc=john.g.johnson@oracle.com \
--cc=john.levon@nutanix.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=marcandre.lureau@gmail.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=pkrempa@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=swapnil.ingle@nutanix.com \
--cc=thanos.makatos@nutanix.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).