From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58912) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fBaGB-0004Yo-H9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 02:20:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fBaG8-0006eO-C1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 02:20:03 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:43420 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fBaG8-0006e1-7r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 02:20:00 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6698FEC00F for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 06:19:56 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Armbruster References: <20180424214550.32549-1-lersek@redhat.com> <20180424214550.32549-6-lersek@redhat.com> <877eovahoq.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <5ffb031a-554a-81c1-b374-eb82f410bf83@redhat.com> <7cc33c11-1a6f-1cf8-8115-f0cd4633a482@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 08:19:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <7cc33c11-1a6f-1cf8-8115-f0cd4633a482@redhat.com> (Laszlo Ersek's message of "Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:56:46 +0200") Message-ID: <87wowu4hh5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/6] qapi: extract CpuInfoCommon to mitigate schema duplication List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: Eric Blake , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Laszlo Ersek writes: > On 04/25/18 21:12, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 04/25/2018 08:20 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> >>> ... >>> >>> and people would ask themselves ever after, "are there some common >>> fields in there that we could extract ... hmmm, @props and @arch, okay, >>> maybe, maybe not, grey area". Let's do it now and save them the thinking. >> >> No, CpuInfo is slated for death in the next year or so; per commit >> ff9a9156. Good catch, I missed it. >> Once it disappears (in 2.14 or 2.15?), we will ONLY have >> CpuInfoFast (although we might rename it at that time, as the name of >> QMP structs is not part of the introspection interface). >> >> So, my personal inclination is to just live with the mindless >> near-duplication until the deprecation period ends, rather than wasting >> cycles refactoring things just to refactor it back out when removing the >> dead code later. >> > > This is an important update; thank you for it. Because, it tells me that > we might not need to add @target to CpuInfo at all. Why *extend* an > interface that is deprecated to the point that we're reluctant even to > *refactor* it? > > (BTW, I had noticed the deprecation note in the schema source code, from > what you've now identified as commit ff9a9156; I didn't know what it > meant -- I didn't know it carried a removal sentence.) No need to enhance it even without a removal sentence. > The consequence is that I could drop the painful modifications for > qmp_query_cpus() altogether, and just keep the simple ones for > qmp_query_cpus_fast(). > > Markus, does that work for you? Forget about @CpuInfo for good? Absolutely.