From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] net: hub-based networking
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 12:56:41 +0800
Message-ID: <4FCC4009.9060907@codemonkey.ws>
References: <1337882362-20100-1-git-send-email-zwu.kernel@gmail.com>
	<20120524175321.31254444@doriath.home>
	<20120525100753.GD30110@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
	<m3vcjkfr04.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<CAJSP0QW=fkLFaH7PdwOPqwykykE_wf_Wq7w9b+32+-K3sjnk=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120525095313.116f680f@doriath.home>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, zwu.kernel@gmail.com,
	wuzhy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, pbonzini@redhat.com
To: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Return-path: <qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120525095313.116f680f@doriath.home>
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>
Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org
Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 05/25/2012 08:53 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 13:01:37 +0100
> Stefan Hajnoczi<stefanha@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> I agree it would be nice to drop entirely but I don't feel happy doing
>> that to users who might have QEMU buried in scripts somewhere.  One
>> day they upgrade packages and suddenly their stuff doesn't work
>> anymore.
>
> This is very similar to kqemu and I don't think we regret having dropped it.

You couldn't imagine the number of complaints I got from users about dropping 
kqemu.  It caused me considerable pain.  Complaints ranged from down right 
hostile (I had to involve the Launchpad admins at one point because of a 
particular user) to entirely sympathetic.

kqemu wasn't just a maintenance burden, it was preventing large guest memory 
support in KVM guests.  There was no simple way around it without breaking kqemu 
ABI and making significant changes to the kqemu module.

Dropping features is only something that should be approached lightly and 
certainly not something that should be done just because you don't like a 
particular bit of code.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>