Re: virtiofsd: Where should it live?

From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	"Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
	qemu-block@nongnu.org, mszeredi@redhat.com,
	"Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
	"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	"Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	"Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	"Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>,
	"Max Reitz" <mreitz@redhat.com>,
	vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: virtiofsd: Where should it live?
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 08:43:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8wofsda.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191203111949.GB267814@redhat.com> ("Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Be?= =?utf-8?Q?rrang=C3=A9=22's?= message of "Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:19:49 +0000")

Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:06:44AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 10:53, Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > We seem to be coming to the conclusion something that:
>> >
>> >   a) It should live in the qemu tree
>> >   b) It shouldn't live under contrib
>> >   c) We'll create a new top level, i.e. 'daemons'
>> >   d) virtiofsd will be daemons/virtiofsd
>> >
>> > Now, somethings I'm less clear on:
>> >   e) What else would move into daemons?  It was suggested
>> >     that if we've got virtiofsd in there, then we should move
>> >     libvhost-user - which I understand, but then it's not a
>> >     'daemons'.
>> >     Are there any otehr daemons that should move?
>> 
>> I like the idea of a new top level directory, but I think
>> 'daemons' is a bit too specific -- for instance it seems to
>> me that qemu-img would be sensible to move out of the root,
>> and that's not a daemon.
>
> Do we really need an extra directory level ?

+1

> IIUC, the main point against having $GIT_ROOT/virtiofsd is that
> the root of our repo is quite cluttered already.
>
> Rather than trying to create a multi-level hierarchy which adds
> a debate around naming, why not address the clutter by moving
> *ALL* the .c/.h files out of the root so that we have a flatter
> tree:
>
>   $GITROOT
>     +- qemu-system
>     |   +- vl.c
>     |   +- ...most other files...

Sounds good to me.

>     +- qemu-img
>     |   +- qemu-img.c

Perhaps this one can all go into existing block/, similar to how
pr-manager-helper.c is in scsi/, and virtfs-proxy-helper.c is in fsdev/.
Up to the block maintainers, of course.

>     +- qemu-nbd
>     |   +- qemu-nbd.c

block/ or nbd/?

>     +- qemu-io
>     |   +- qemu-io.c
>     |   +- qemu-io-cmds.c

block/?

>     +- qemu-bridge-helper

net/?

>     |   ...
>     +- qemu-edid

Has its own MAINTAINERS section, together with hw/display/edit* and
include/hw/display/edid.h.  I'm not sure moving it hw/display/ is a good
idea.  Gerd?

>     +- qemu-keymap

Not covered by MAINTAINERS.  scripts/get_maintainer.pl --git-blame
points to Gerd.

>     +- qga  (already exists)

Yes.

> Then we can add virtiofsd and other programs at the root with no big
> issue.

We don't *have* to put each program into its own directory.  Simple ones
could also share one.  We just need a directory name.