From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46730)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VU00q-0002dl-2i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:05:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VU00j-0008Kc-RA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:05:39 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41553)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VU00j-0008KL-DN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:05:33 -0400
Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r99K5Wf2010151
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:05:32 -0400
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 17:05:17 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20131009200517.GB16670@amt.cnet>
References: <20131008004126.773017235@amt.cnet>
	<874n8sp68n.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <5253BC12.90105@redhat.com>
	<20131008220329.GB16625@amt.cnet>
	<87r4bv7yjl.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87r4bv7yjl.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 0/2] force -mem-path RAM allocation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:23:26AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:02:26AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 08/10/2013 09:32, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
> >> > We have
> >> > 
> >> >     -mem-path FILE  provide backing storage for guest RAM
> >> >     -mem-prealloc   preallocate guest memory (use with -mem-path)
> >> > 
> >> > PATCH 2/2 adds
> >> > 
> >> >     -mem-path-force fail if unable to allocate RAM as specified by
> >> > -mem-path
> >> > 
> >> > Looks like it's time to consolidate the options related to guest memory
> >> > into a single, QemuOpts-style -memory NAME=VALUE,...  What do you guys
> >> > think?
> >> 
> >> Yes, we can use "-numa memory" (or "-numa mem") that Wanlong Gao is
> >> adding.  We can add path=, preallocate= and force= options there.
> >> 
> >> Paolo
> >
> > It would be important for the new option to be backportable 
> > independently. Therefore mixing it with -numa is not an option.
> >
> > Also due to backportability supporting a new style of command line
> > for -mem-path is problematic (management must be changed accordingly).
> 
> We've converted -FOO ARG options to QemuOpts-style -FOO
> NAME=VALUE,... before.  You can use QemuOptsList member implied_opt_name
> to get bare ARG accepted.  Works except for ARGs containing '=' or ','.
> 
> Management still has to detect whether -FOO is old or new.  QMP command
> query-command-line-options should do.
> 
> > Can the new option format for memory be created incrementally on 
> > top of -mem-path-force? (agree its a good thing, it avoids proliferation
> > of new options).
> 
> If you do it on top, it won't avoid proliferation, or am I missing
> something?

Right. But in fact, the new option is not necessary. 

So please consider only patch 2 for inclusion.