From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
Programmingkid <programmingkidx@gmail.com>,
Gonglei <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] monitor: allow object_del & device_del to accept QOM paths
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:23:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150901132327.GD6860@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55E5A569.3030603@suse.de>
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 03:17:29PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 01.09.2015 um 11:50 schrieb Daniel P. Berrange:
> > Currently both object_del and device_del require that the
> > client provide the object/device short ID. While user
> > creatable objects require an ID to be provided at time of
> > creation, qdev devices may be created without giving an
> > ID. The only unique identifier they would then have is the
> > QOM object path.
> >
> > Allowing device_del to accept an object path ensures all
> > devices are deletable regardless of whether they have an
> > ID.
> >
> > (qemu) device_add usb-mouse
> > (qemu) qom-list /machine/peripheral-anon
> > device[0] (child<usb-mouse>)
> > type (string)
> > (qemu) device_del /machine/peripheral-anon/device[0]
> >
> > Although objects require an ID to be provided upfront,
> > there may be cases where the client would prefer to
> > use QOM paths when deleting.
> >
> > Devices are required to be marked as hotpluggable
> > otherwise an error is raised
> >
> > (qemu) device_del /machine/unattached/device[4]
> > Device 'PIIX3' does not support hotplugging
> >
> > Similarly objects are required to implement the
> > user-creatable interface
> >
> > (qemu) object_del /machine/unattached/device[4]
> > /machine/unattached/device[4] is not a user-creatable object
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Changed in v3:
> >
> > - Add type checks to avoid assertion failures if user
> > supplied path is not of type device or user-creatable
> >
> > hmp-commands.hx | 6 ++++--
> > qapi-schema.json | 4 ++--
> > qdev-monitor.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> > qmp-commands.hx | 13 +++++++++++--
> > qmp.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> > 5 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hmp-commands.hx b/hmp-commands.hx
> > index d3b7932..c0c113d 100644
> > --- a/hmp-commands.hx
> > +++ b/hmp-commands.hx
> > @@ -675,7 +675,8 @@ ETEXI
> > STEXI
> > @item device_del @var{id}
> > @findex device_del
> > -Remove device @var{id}.
> > +Remove device @var{id}. @var{id} may be a short ID
> > +or a QOM object path.
>
> Have you considered using two alternative parameters, id and qom-path?
> (qom_path was used elsewhere)
I'm not fussed either way, but I thought it simpler to not try to change
the accepted parameters of the existing commands. Looking, the only
place I notice that uses a 'qom_path' is the return data in the CpuInfo
struct.
Does anyone have strong feelings either way about use of id for both vs
qom-path or id ?
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-01 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-01 9:50 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] monitor: allow object_del & device_del to accept QOM paths Daniel P. Berrange
2015-09-01 13:13 ` Gonglei
2015-09-01 13:17 ` Andreas Färber
2015-09-01 13:23 ` Daniel P. Berrange [this message]
2015-09-01 15:55 ` Eric Blake
2015-09-01 15:58 ` Programmingkid
2015-09-01 16:00 ` Andreas Färber
2015-09-01 15:57 ` Eric Blake
2015-09-02 9:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150901132327.GD6860@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=arei.gonglei@huawei.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=programmingkidx@gmail.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).