From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>,
kwolf@redhat.com, el13635@mail.ntua.gr, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
f4bug@amsat.org, pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] vl: Partial support for non-scalar properties with -object
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 17:29:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180416162919.GC12819@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87lgmme6ji.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 01:24:17PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:47:44PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> >> On 08/11/2017 11:05 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> > We've wanted -object to support non-scalar properties for a while.
> >> > Dan Berrange tried in "[PATCH v4 00/10]Provide a QOM-based
> >> > authorization API". Review led to the conclusion that we need to
> >> > replace rather than add to QemuOpts. Initial work towards that goal
> >> > has been merged to provide -blockdev (commit 8746709), but there's
> >> > substantial work left, mostly due to an bewildering array of
> >> > compatibility problems.
> >> >
> >> > Even if a full solution is still out of reach, we can have a partial
> >> > solution now: accept -object argument in JSON syntax. This should
> >> > unblock development work that needs non-scalar properties with
> >> > -object.
> >> >
> >> > The implementation is similar to -blockdev, except we use the new
> >> > infrastructure only for the new JSON case, and stick to QemuOpts for
> >> > the existing KEY=VALUE,... case, to sidestep compatibility problems.
> >> >
> >> > If we did this for more options, we'd have to factor out common code.
> >> > But for one option, this will do.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > qapi-schema.json | 14 +++++++++++---
> >> > vl.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > 2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > static void object_create(bool (*type_predicate)(const char *))
> >> > {
> >> > + ObjectOptionsQueueEntry *e, *next;
> >> > +
> >> > + QSIMPLEQ_FOREACH_SAFE(e, &oo_queue, entry, next) {
> >> > + if (!type_predicate(e->oo->qom_type)) {
> >> > + continue;
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >> > + loc_push_restore(&e->loc);
> >> > + qmp_object_add(e->oo->qom_type, e->oo->id,
> >> > + e->oo->has_props, e->oo->props, &error_fatal);
> >> > + loc_pop(&e->loc);
> >> > +
> >> > + QSIMPLEQ_REMOVE(&oo_queue, e, ObjectOptionsQueueEntry, entry);
> >> > + qapi_free_ObjectOptions(e->oo);
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >> > if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("object"),
> >>
> >> This handles all JSON forms prior to any QemuOpt forms (within the two
> >> priority levels), such that a command line using:
> >>
> >> -object type,id=1,oldstyle... -object '{'id':2, 'type':..., newstyle...}'
> >>
> >> processes the arguments in a different order than
> >>
> >> -object type,id=1,oldstyle... -object type,id=2,oldstyle
> >>
> >> But I don't see that as too bad (ideally, someone using the {} JSON
> >> style will use it consistently).
> >
> > I don't really like such a constraint - the ordering of object
> > creation is already complex with some objets created at a different
> > point in startup to other objects. Adding yet another constraint
> > feels like it is painting ourselves into a corner wrt future changes.
>
> The full solution will evaluate -object left to right.
>
> This partial solution doesn't, but it's not meant for use in anger, just
> for unblocking development work. Can add scary warnings to deter
> premature use.
>
> > In particular I think it is quite possible to use the dotted
> > form primarily, and only use JSON for the immediate scenario
> > where non-JSON form won't work - I expect that's how we would
> > use it in libvirt - I don't see libvirt changing 100% to JSON
> > based objects
>
> You need the JSON form anyway for QMP, and for the cases where dotted
> keys break down. Doing both just for the command line requires code to
> do dotted keys (which may already exist), and code to decide whether it
> can be used (which probably doesn't exist, yet).
>
> Wouldn't this add complexity? For what benefit exactly?
Surprisingly, it appears we do actually have code that generates the
JSON syntax for (probably) all uses of -object today. In fact we are
actually generating JSON and then converting it to dotted syntax in
most cases, which I didn't realize when writing the above.
We'll have to keep support for dotted syntax around a while for old
QEMU versions, but it looks like we could reasonably easily switch
to JSON syntax for all -object usage at the same time.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-16 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-11 16:05 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] vl: Partial support for non-scalar properties with -object Markus Armbruster
2017-08-11 16:05 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] vl: Factor object_create() out of main() Markus Armbruster
2017-08-11 16:05 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] vl: Partial support for non-scalar properties with -object Markus Armbruster
2017-08-11 17:47 ` Eric Blake
2017-08-14 5:49 ` Markus Armbruster
2018-04-16 16:24 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2018-05-28 9:30 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-08-14 9:44 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-08-14 11:24 ` Markus Armbruster
2018-04-16 16:29 ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2018-05-28 9:14 ` Markus Armbruster
2018-04-16 16:17 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] " Daniel P. Berrangé
2018-05-28 9:31 ` Markus Armbruster
2018-06-08 17:11 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
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=20180416162919.GC12819@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=el13635@mail.ntua.gr \
--cc=f4bug@amsat.org \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.