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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 EE0DCC10DCE for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:45:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE33F222C3 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:45:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="L1CKXP5z" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AE33F222C3 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 ([::1]:40954 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jBmh3-0006fS-SZ for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:45:41 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59288) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jBmfp-0004Z8-1L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:44:27 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jBmfm-0005Fx-Cd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:44:24 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:23018 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jBmfm-0005Co-46 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:44:22 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1583876660; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+pW5Q4cdOWCajEaaNvS77JAvWxHmK38/oLjRoCGReAw=; b=L1CKXP5zL8SXzdZF8tt9nGBc8bN4LrDdcbnF9arVwV7Cn8yV0ubxjq5R2rv0gO3UAo5bTi of7pFSesBgMXO8Y7rcJ4hpd02ZHR1zMgGERwQTl7ITgybmhXliEG+jpwqMJ21N7e6e/R4E Jfr66Az3PsihOk1+Pvw9GXqac9PnSso= Received: from mail-qv1-f72.google.com (mail-qv1-f72.google.com [209.85.219.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-15-kZWCE3npPNG2KE898GxuLg-1; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:44:18 -0400 X-MC-Unique: kZWCE3npPNG2KE898GxuLg-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f72.google.com with SMTP id h17so31558qvc.18 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:44:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=XOiCiAELTh27dIix4JLjy0/MbyuH+/LsOgb0H2TMTk4=; b=goKPZEG414JkKGrYIuedBq3hX28uY9GO/0cehUYTProZFU2tDgelOk9ursiE8lK+hO 9PNwdAZs84xFt3tIOZ/ebirPPNozxRsTG4nV4aXpHgGGWUwGDBEtIFOIu0Ca77hXT/60 Qgovom5h88yCNQ/mfTMxNIe97c2jGtteABRU09bQ2fkfjd3n1ddhpqiPinq23qvqf0gW gJnkbi5KksCIxhiUn7Nc6JO8j+FkoNaFAY/0g22L5jkVa6HdbcoEizxKSlHzrV2N8w5p +4hJHy7Z9MAl82B8mtU3jGKMq2TzRFZ9jF9RBinNXy3ZaQuAVzE1ZO44wp6nmYYNjp+u J65Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ31RU/E6yOmA+821P+QF25bClhqdgAiOPTC9VdvxKqYjxy2a3Wa fUJsaoicA07wiZdbWkS+G0786khATCN5I6nrFIWFbfY1d0+4fOO7xma8Vnxqhzz3lHtMhz7hLfM 9u1+4Xz9PzVU6lNI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:22b:: with SMTP id u11mr21403283qkm.225.1583876657907; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:44:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vslOEu8u2iVOg6ZaujoLXi1MJaweFmncDMucoDm1pRUyR+Ydtb2IqCEpK/vQmNjaQYcIVBiRA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:22b:: with SMTP id u11mr21403254qkm.225.1583876657529; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com (bzq-79-178-2-19.red.bezeqint.net. [79.178.2.19]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 11sm25209866qkr.101.2020.03.10.14.44.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:44:11 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Liran Alon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/16]: hw/i386/vmport: Bug fixes and improvements Message-ID: <20200310173020-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20200310165332.140774-1-liran.alon@oracle.com> <20200310133932-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20200310164239-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 207.211.31.120 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: nikita.leshchenko@oracle.com, ehabkost@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, rth@twiddle.net Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 02:29:42PM -0700, Liran Alon wrote: >=20 > On 10/03/2020 22:56, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 08:09:09PM +0200, Liran Alon wrote: > > > On 10/03/2020 19:44, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 06:53:16PM +0200, Liran Alon wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > >=20 > > > > > This series aims to fix several bugs in VMPort and improve it by = supporting > > > > > more VMPort commands and make command results more configurable t= o > > > > > user via QEMU command-line. > > > > >=20 > > > > > This functionality was proven to be useful to run various VMware = VMs > > > > > when attempting to run them as-is on top of QEMU/KVM. > > > > >=20 > > > > > For more details, see commit messages. > > > > Well two versions in one day and some review comments weren't addre= ssed. > > > There is a single review comment that wasn't addressed which is repla= cing an > > > enum with a comment. And I explicitly mentioned that it's because I w= ant > > > additional opinion on this. > > > I don't see why such a small thing should block review for 15 patches= ... > > > All the rest of the comments (Which were great) have been addressed. = Unless > > > I have mistakenly missed something, which please point it out if I di= d. > > OK I just took a quick peek, two things quickly jumped out at me. > Thanks for having a look. > >=20 > > version property really should be a boolean and have some documentation > > saying what functionality enables. > I thought that having a version number approach is more generic and easy = to > maintain going forward. > If I understand correctly, this is also the approach taken by qxl & qxl-v= ga. >=20 > The more elaborate alternative could have been introducing compat_flags (= As > PVSCSI does) but it seems like it will pollute the property space with a = lot > of useless VMPort properties. > (E.g. x-read-eax-bug, x-no-report-unsupported-cmd, x-no-report-vmx-type a= nd > etc.). >=20 > What is the advantage of having a boolean such as "x-vmport-v2" instead o= f > having a single "version" property? It's not clear what should happen going forward. Let's say version is incremented again. This then becomes challenging for downstreams to backport. > Will it suffice if I would just add documentation above "version" propert= y > on what is was the functionality in "version=3D=3D1"? > (Though, it's just easy to scan the vmport.c code for if's involving > ">version"... "version" is more of an internal field for machine-type > compatibility and not really meant to be used by user) >=20 > Which approach do you prefer? I just dislike versions, they are hard to maintain. Individual ones is cleanest imho. Self-documenting. But if not, I'd do something like "x-vmport-fixes" and set bits there for each bugfix. > > userspace properties should use the non-abbreviated > > vm-executable since vmx is easy to confuse with vm extensions. > I really wish you would reconsider this. VMX is a really common term in > VMware terminology. > It is found in binary names, ".vmx" file, ".vmx" file properties, VMware > Tools prints, open-vm-tools source code and etc. Well that at least is easy to google. =09.vmx =09.vmx =09This is the primary configuration file, which stores settings =09chosen in the New Virtual Machine Wizard or virtual machine settings =09editor. If you created the virtual machine under an earlier version of =09VMware Workstation on a Linux host, this file may have a .cfg extension so .vmx as used here has nothing to do with VM Executable version or type. Looks like it's just a source of confusion on the vmware side too :) >=20 > In contrast, even though I have dealt for many years with VMware > technologies, I have never known that VMX=3D=3Dvm-executable. Well you said that's what it stands for. I have no idea. From what you say now maybe vmx basically is being used as a prefix for all things vmware. In that case vmport-version and vmport-type or even vmware-version and vmware-type will do just as well. > I still think it will introduce much confusion. On the other hard, I don'= t > see much confusing with this use of VMX with Intel VT-x > because it is only used inside vmport.c and in vmport properties names. A= nd > the properties names match the names of the guest > code that interface with vmport in open-vm-tools source code. >=20 > If you still have a strong opinion on this, I will change it as you say i= n > v3... But please consider above arguments. I'm just saying don't use vmx. It's too late to try to give it a different meaning. Figure out what it's supposed to stand for and write it out in full. > >=20 > > That's just a quick look. > >=20 > >=20 > > > > Some people do this, try to wear the maintainers out by sheer volum= e. > > > > It works sometimes but it's not a nice tactic. I personally think i= t's > > > > worth taking the time to think harder about ways to address all > > > > comments, not try to dismiss them. > > > That's not what I tried to do. I carefully fixed all comments I saw i= n the > > > review discussion and run tests. > > > The only thing which wasn't addressed is removing an enum and replaci= ng it > > > with a comment. > > > The hint that I try to manipulate maintainers is disrespectful. I ass= ume > > > that this isn't your intention, as we all just want to collaborate to= gether > > > here. No need to make this a personal discussion. > > >=20 > > > If you think that replacing the enum with a comment is a blocker for = v2 > > > patch-series, I will go ahead and submit v3 with that change. > > Yes IMHO it needs to be fixed but please go over the comments and try t= o > > address them all as best you can, instead of looking for an explanation > > why the comments were irrelevant and can be dismissed. >=20 > I'm not trying to finding explanation on why the comments are irrelevant = and > can be dismissed... It's not my first time contributing code to QEMU/KVM.= .. >=20 > > Sure someone > > might propose you introduce a bug, and that can't just be addressed, bu= t > > that's not the case here. Also please do not send multiple revisions o= f > > a large patchset in a day. People need time for review. > OK. I will make note of that for next time. > I would have thought maintainers prefer to always have ability to pick up > the latest version that is ready to avoid reviewing old code that was > already discussed. Assuming all previous comments were addressed. >=20 > Thanks, > -Liran >=20