From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michal Prívozník" <mprivozn@redhat.com>,
"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Igor Mammedov" <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qmp: Stabilize preconfig
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 07:50:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABgObfbPkKpE06-HhdW2OxOdzbhWZzrhNFKps3jH78Je8Nv12w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tugdh1gl.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2456 bytes --]
El lun., 15 nov. 2021 16:40, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> escribió:
> > Why do you care? For another example, you can use "reboot" or
> > "systemctl isolate reboot.target" and they end up doing the same thing.
> >
> > As long as qemu_init invokes qmp_machine_set, qmp_accel_set,
> > qmp_device_add, qmp_plugin_add, qmp_cont, etc. to do its job, the
> > difference between qemu-system-* and qemu-qmp-* is a couple thousands
> > lines of boring code that all but disappears once the VM is up and
> > running. IOW, with the right design (e.g. shortcut options for QOM
> > properties good; dozens of global variables bad), there's absolutely no
> > issue with some people using qemu-system-* and some using qemu-qmp-*.
>
> I think maintaining two binaries forever is madness. I want the old one
> to wither away.
This seems a bit dogmatic to me. The difference between the two binaries
would be literally a single file, which basically disappears before
anything interesting happens.
Making the new binary capable of serving all use cases should not be
> hard, just work (see my design sketch). I expect the result to serve
> *better* than the mess we have now.
>
Most of the mess is in the implementation. Not all, granted. But overall
softmmu/vl.c's ugliness is mostly due to the layers of backwards
compatibility, and that wouldn't go away very soon.
>>>> My point is that we still have quite a few commands without
> >>>> 'allow-preconfig' mostly because we are afraid of allowing them in
> >>>> preconfig state, not because of true phase dependencies.
> >>>
> >>> I think there's very few of them, if any (outside the block layer for
> >>> which patches exist), and those are due to distraction more than fear.
> >>
> >> qapi/*.json has 216 commands, of which 26 carry 'allow-preconfig'.
> >
> > Well,
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-06/msg01597.html
> > alone would more than double that. :)
> >
> > Places like machine.json, machine-target.json, migration.json,
> > replay.json have a lot of commands that are, obviously, almost entirely
> > not suitable for preconfig. I don't think there are many commands left,
> > I'd guess maybe 30 (meaning that ~60% are done).
>
> My point is that "very few" is not literally true, and I think you just
> confirmed it ;)
Ok, let me rephrase that as "most of the missing ones are block-layer
relates". ;)
Paolo
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3768 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 6:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-25 11:08 [PATCH] qmp: Stabilize preconfig Michal Privoznik
2021-10-25 12:19 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-10-25 17:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-01 14:37 ` Michal Prívozník
2021-11-01 14:57 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2021-11-03 8:02 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-03 9:27 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2021-11-10 12:54 ` Michal Prívozník
2021-11-10 13:23 ` Damien Hedde
2021-11-10 21:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-11 6:11 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-11 8:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-11 14:37 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-11 19:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 11:48 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-12 22:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-13 7:52 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-15 12:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-15 15:40 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-11-16 6:50 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
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=CABgObfbPkKpE06-HhdW2OxOdzbhWZzrhNFKps3jH78Je8Nv12w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=mprivozn@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).