From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44338) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WD3Ns-0007Ac-Nh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:47:46 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WD3Nm-0006zk-I5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:47:40 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:25026) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WD3Nm-0006za-8Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:47:34 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:47:21 -0500 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20140210214721.2df300e4@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <52F9620D.5040204@redhat.com> References: <1390890126-17377-1-git-send-email-qiaonuohan@cn.fujitsu.com> <1390890126-17377-14-git-send-email-qiaonuohan@cn.fujitsu.com> <20140210141048.796e9c91@redhat.com> <52F94C84.20105@redhat.com> <52F95C46.3030701@redhat.com> <52F9611D.7000808@redhat.com> <52F9620D.5040204@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 13/13] dump: add 'query-dump-guest-memory-capability' command List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: stefanha@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qiaonuohan , kumagai-atsushi@mxc.nes.nec.co.jp, anderson@redhat.com, Laszlo Ersek , afaerber@suse.de On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:34:37 +0100 Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 11/02/2014 00:30, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto: > >> > However, I don't see the point in having the "format-option" field. What > >> > about: > >> > > >> > -> { "execute": "query-dump-guest-memory-capabilities" } > >> > <- { "return": { "formats": > >> > ["elf", "kdump-zlib", "kdump-lzo", "kdump-snappy"] } > > Technically you might be right. However, this partial introspection > > feature is entirely a wart > > I don't see it entirely like that. For example, whether paging is > supported could also be part of the capabilities and not part of the > regular QAPI introspection. Of course, quiaonuohan need not add > anything like that. > > > whose existence is exclusively justified by > > non-technical reasons, such as deadlines, and not wanting to be blocked > > indefinitely by architecture astronautics around full introspection. I > > don't see the point of polishing it beyond bare usability, at least not > > after I've reviewed three versions of the patchset. > > Luiz, can you apply patches 1-12 for now? I agree with Laszlo that, no > matter how unfortunate this is, the "unused" warnings are a necessary > evil and one that can be worked around easily when bisecting. Yes, I can. But what's the problem with patch 13? For me having Eric's ACK is enough for applying it. Anything else will be done by QMP introspection.