From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39720) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAk-0008Dr-OA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAj-0002N3-GY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46030) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAj-0002K9-8U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:45 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B1F13091783 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:47:40 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Message-ID: <20190430124740.GM6818@redhat.com> Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <20190423212246.3542-1-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20190423212246.3542-2-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20190424082652.GC28615@redhat.com> <20190424182036.GH18406@habkost.net> <20190430101006.GA6818@redhat.com> <20190430124236.GC28722@habkost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190430124236.GC28722@habkost.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] qapi: SupportStatusInfo struct List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mprivozn@redhat.com, Markus Armbruster On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 09:42:36AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:10:06AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote= : > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 03:20:36PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 09:26:52AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 w= rote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 06:22:44PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > This struct will be used to represent support and deprecation > > > > > status of QEMU features. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost > > > > > --- > > > > > qapi/common.json | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) > > > > >=20 > > > > > diff --git a/qapi/common.json b/qapi/common.json > > > > > index 99d313ef3b..b59d0dc66b 100644 > > > > > --- a/qapi/common.json > > > > > +++ b/qapi/common.json > > > > > @@ -193,3 +193,27 @@ > > > > > 'ppc64', 'riscv32', 'riscv64', 's390x', 'sh4', > > > > > 'sh4eb', 'sparc', 'sparc64', 'tricore', 'unicore3= 2', > > > > > 'x86_64', 'xtensa', 'xtensaeb' ] } > > > > > + > > > > > +## > > > > > +# @SupportStatusInfo: > > > > > +# > > > > > +# Information on support status of a given feature > > > > > +# (e.g. machine type) > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @deprecated: if true, the given feature is deprecated and ma= y be removed > > > > > +# in future versions of QEMU according to the QEM= U deprecation > > > > > +# policy. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @status-message: Human readable message describing support s= tatus > > > > > +# of the feature. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @suggested-alternative: Optional. Suggested alternative for= a deprecated > > > > > +# feature. For machine types, this sh= ould be the name > > > > > +# of an available machine-type. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# Since: 4.1 > > > > > +## > > > > > +{ 'struct': 'SupportStatusInfo', > > > > > + 'data': { 'deprecated': 'bool', > > > > > + '*status-message': 'str', > > > > > + '*suggested-alternative': 'str' } } > > > >=20 > > > > I see status-message has to be optional, since you're embedding t= he > > > > struct into another struct and want deprecated=3D=3Dfalse by defa= ult. > > > >=20 > > > > I'd be inclined to change it to embed a pointer to the struct and > > > > drop the deprecated field, and make both status-message and > > > > suggested-alternative be mandatory. ie a struct "DeprecationInfo= "=20 > > > > the pointer to which is NULL if not deprecated. > > >=20 > > > That could be a simple solution if we were sure we would only > > > track deprecation info. But I would like us to track additional > > > support status on that struct eventually. > >=20 > > I've no objection to expanding it to capture other info - we'll > > want to change the 'deprecated' field to an enum though. Also, > > in some cases there won't be any real alternative so lets just > > call it 'hint' instead. How about > >=20 > > { 'enum': "SupportStatus", > > 'data': { 'production', # Secure for use in hostile production= env > > 'development', # No security guarentee, friendly dev = only > > 'deprecated', # To be removed in the future > > } } >=20 > "secure for production" and "deprecated" are independent > variables. There are deprecated features that are still secure, > and deprecated features that were never supposed to be used in > production in the first place. Good point - we should track quality status separately. So still need a boolean deprecation flag too i guess.=20 >=20 > >=20 > > { 'struct': "SupportStatusInfo", > > 'data': { 'status': 'SupportStatus', > > '*info': 'str', > > '*hint': 'str' } } >=20 > "hint" seems nicer than "suggested" or "recommended". I like it. >=20 > --=20 > Eduardo Regards, Daniel --=20 |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberran= ge :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.c= om :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberran= ge :| From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=FROM_EXCESS_BASE64, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E34C43219 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:49:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 371ED2075E for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:49:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 371ED2075E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46755 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSC3-0000QA-Ff for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:49:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39720) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAk-0008Dr-OA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAj-0002N3-GY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46030) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hLSAj-0002K9-8U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:47:45 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B1F13091783 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.22.189]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37FAB2B3AB; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:47:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:47:40 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20190430124740.GM6818@redhat.com> References: <20190423212246.3542-1-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20190423212246.3542-2-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20190424082652.GC28615@redhat.com> <20190424182036.GH18406@habkost.net> <20190430101006.GA6818@redhat.com> <20190430124236.GC28722@habkost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190430124236.GC28722@habkost.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.41]); Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] qapi: SupportStatusInfo struct X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: mprivozn@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Message-ID: <20190430124740.kpSGggtM4IZdEHrZUQVkp-42JdrRsPcGbc2vb1RlQ3M@z> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 09:42:36AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:10:06AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote= : > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 03:20:36PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 09:26:52AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 w= rote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 06:22:44PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > This struct will be used to represent support and deprecation > > > > > status of QEMU features. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost > > > > > --- > > > > > qapi/common.json | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) > > > > >=20 > > > > > diff --git a/qapi/common.json b/qapi/common.json > > > > > index 99d313ef3b..b59d0dc66b 100644 > > > > > --- a/qapi/common.json > > > > > +++ b/qapi/common.json > > > > > @@ -193,3 +193,27 @@ > > > > > 'ppc64', 'riscv32', 'riscv64', 's390x', 'sh4', > > > > > 'sh4eb', 'sparc', 'sparc64', 'tricore', 'unicore3= 2', > > > > > 'x86_64', 'xtensa', 'xtensaeb' ] } > > > > > + > > > > > +## > > > > > +# @SupportStatusInfo: > > > > > +# > > > > > +# Information on support status of a given feature > > > > > +# (e.g. machine type) > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @deprecated: if true, the given feature is deprecated and ma= y be removed > > > > > +# in future versions of QEMU according to the QEM= U deprecation > > > > > +# policy. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @status-message: Human readable message describing support s= tatus > > > > > +# of the feature. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# @suggested-alternative: Optional. Suggested alternative for= a deprecated > > > > > +# feature. For machine types, this sh= ould be the name > > > > > +# of an available machine-type. > > > > > +# > > > > > +# Since: 4.1 > > > > > +## > > > > > +{ 'struct': 'SupportStatusInfo', > > > > > + 'data': { 'deprecated': 'bool', > > > > > + '*status-message': 'str', > > > > > + '*suggested-alternative': 'str' } } > > > >=20 > > > > I see status-message has to be optional, since you're embedding t= he > > > > struct into another struct and want deprecated=3D=3Dfalse by defa= ult. > > > >=20 > > > > I'd be inclined to change it to embed a pointer to the struct and > > > > drop the deprecated field, and make both status-message and > > > > suggested-alternative be mandatory. ie a struct "DeprecationInfo= "=20 > > > > the pointer to which is NULL if not deprecated. > > >=20 > > > That could be a simple solution if we were sure we would only > > > track deprecation info. But I would like us to track additional > > > support status on that struct eventually. > >=20 > > I've no objection to expanding it to capture other info - we'll > > want to change the 'deprecated' field to an enum though. Also, > > in some cases there won't be any real alternative so lets just > > call it 'hint' instead. How about > >=20 > > { 'enum': "SupportStatus", > > 'data': { 'production', # Secure for use in hostile production= env > > 'development', # No security guarentee, friendly dev = only > > 'deprecated', # To be removed in the future > > } } >=20 > "secure for production" and "deprecated" are independent > variables. There are deprecated features that are still secure, > and deprecated features that were never supposed to be used in > production in the first place. Good point - we should track quality status separately. So still need a boolean deprecation flag too i guess.=20 >=20 > >=20 > > { 'struct': "SupportStatusInfo", > > 'data': { 'status': 'SupportStatus', > > '*info': 'str', > > '*hint': 'str' } } >=20 > "hint" seems nicer than "suggested" or "recommended". I like it. >=20 > --=20 > Eduardo Regards, Daniel --=20 |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberran= ge :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.c= om :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberran= ge :|