From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51076) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaQic-0003Iz-Uy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 11:30:50 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaQiX-0005zw-OL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 11:30:46 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40854) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaQiX-0005zn-Hs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 11:30:41 -0500 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8646E627C1 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 16:30:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1456763436.3566.4.camel@redhat.com> From: Andrea Bolognani Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:30:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20160222013521.GA14065@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1455428503-2113-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> <87povy5mim.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20160215103440.GC7978@pxdev.xzpeter.org> <87y4amhuz2.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20160215152205.GC898@redhat.com> <20160218044056.GL7978@pxdev.xzpeter.org> <20160218165208.vdf4ycsrn3qwxd2x@hawk.localdomain> <1455815421.3968.12.camel@redhat.com> <20160219015513.GA17229@pxdev.xzpeter.org> <1455885189.3968.23.camel@redhat.com> <20160222013521.GA14065@pxdev.xzpeter.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: add QMP command to query GIC version List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Xu Cc: wei@redhat.com, libvir-list@redhat.com, Andrew Jones , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 09:35 +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 01:33:09PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > >=C2=A0 > > I didn't say it would be hard :) > >=C2=A0 > > I just said that such compatibility code would have to be kept > > around forever. We already support lots and lots of similar cases > > in libvirt, the difference being that in this case we would add > > support for a new command *knowing in advance* that it will become > > obsolete as soon as a proper implementation is available. > >=C2=A0 > > It might still be the right thing to do! I just want to make sure > > everything's been properly considered and discussed beforehand. >=C2=A0 > I totally agree with you to think more before doing. :) So, anyone else willing to give their $0.2 on how to implement this The Right Way=E2=84=A2? I just skimmed the whole thread again and it doesn't look to me like any consensus has been reached. Cheers. --=C2=A0 Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team