From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MqoAI-0007CM-Lo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:15:18 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MqoAD-0007AP-Pw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:15:18 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57174 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MqoAD-0007AM-L9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:15:13 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41729)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1MqoAD-0007cX-7z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:15:13 -0400
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:14:58 -0300
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ANN: QEMU Monitor Protocol git tree
Message-ID: <20090924101458.00d65388@doriath>
In-Reply-To: <4ABB6F10.4080608@redhat.com>
References: <20090921224430.610da97b@doriath>
	<87my4l1e4e.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org>
	<20090924093146.66191c37@doriath> <4ABB69C0.1000404@redhat.com>
	<20090924100559.07959a7c@doriath> <4ABB6F10.4080608@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:07:28 +0300
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 09/24/2009 04:05 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> >>>    I think the easiest way to have this would be to add a
> >>> monitor command to disable capabilities. Like a command to
> >>> disable async messages.
> >>>
> >>>        
> >> Other way around, enable things that you want.
> >>      
> >   Ok, I will add support for this in my tree then, async messages
> > will be considered a capability.
> >    
> 
> Actually, if async messages are specified from day one they can be 
> always active.  The client can easily ignore them.

 That's also fine by me, but we were talking about having a
command to disable async messages... If we do this, I would
prefer to make it a capability instead, this way it can use
the same infrastructure (as opposed to special treatment).