From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47384) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0CZV-0004Y1-KF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:49:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0CZT-0001QC-Lw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:49:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30502) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0CZT-0001Q7-Ct for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:49:27 -0500 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1MDnQEs025482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:49:26 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:49:27 -0200 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20120222114927.4c303fd0@doriath.home> In-Reply-To: <20120222132250.GG607@garlic.redhat.com> References: <1329686886-6853-1-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com> <1329686886-6853-6-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com> <4F422F5C.9060202@redhat.com> <4F42BB27.6070504@redhat.com> <20120221081948.GC6476@garlic> <4F43C331.7090000@redhat.com> <20120221174016.GO6476@garlic> <20120222111717.0c56390f@doriath.home> <20120222132250.GG607@garlic.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 5/7] qxl-render: call ppm_save on callback List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alon Levy Cc: Eric Blake , Gerd Hoffmann , elmarco@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:22:50 +0100 Alon Levy wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:17:17AM -0200, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:40:16 +0200 > > Alon Levy wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 09:15:45AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > > > > On 02/21/2012 01:19 AM, Alon Levy wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> (2) Async monitor command. Keeps interface and works nicely. A bunch > > > > >>> of QAPI bits tickled into master meanwhile, so we could look at > > > > >>> this again. Luiz? What is the status here? > > > > The qapi infra is already in place for sometime now, but it doesn't support > > async commands yet. However, we're accepting a combination of command + async > > event on completion for commands that have to be async. > > > > We'll eventually have a good interface for async support, but it's not likely > > we'll have it for 1.1 (possible, but unlikely). > > > > I think item 2 above is a good way to go, considering it will add a new command, > > of course. > > > > Ok, so that sounds good: I'll add an event, and later libvirt/autotest > can use it. But in that case I'll need to introduce a connection between > the command and the event, some id. That id will have to be generated by > the command issuer, so a new command with event id + complete event? That's a good question. The only events we have today which are actually a response to an asynchronous command are the block streaming API ones and they don't include an id. Honestly, for this particular case, I'm not 100% sure that having an id is _required_, as I don't expect a client to submit multiple screendump calls in parallel and we don't "officially" support multiple QMP clients either. Also, having the screendump filename in the event will serve as a form of identifier too. Btw, are you planning to add the event to the already existing screendump command? Adding a new command that doesn't use the monitor async API and is truly asynchronous wouldn't better?