From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1N8A1G-0006gx-IF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:01:42 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1N8A1B-0006Wg-Fs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:01:41 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57635 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N8A1B-0006W4-8O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:01:37 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60735)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1N8A1A-00081I-JU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:01:36 -0500
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:59:01 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20091111095901.GA3387@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>
	<20090924101458.00d65388@doriath>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090924101458.00d65388@doriath>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: ANN: QEMU Monitor Protocol git tree
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: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aliguori@us.ibm.com, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:14:58AM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> 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).

Maybe per message type (error/warning/info/debug).

-- 
MST