From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D2B9C4363C for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:05:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFD9F2168B for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:05:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gFsoczKD" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CFD9F2168B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:60514 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQDok-0000Ze-LE for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:05:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37706) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQDo2-00005r-PD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:04:50 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:29942) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQDnz-0004rp-2g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:04:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1602093885; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=hA/Ic/DvHRIWAAPJE/LGTu0E2S1egMhpGna2Sykdi3w=; b=gFsoczKD154lsyNb1b3O0vqhlDCSL57YrjDb+A99qai/65XVGYgxQ0BuzhqVwetDNDTpum iAhvK0k40ku/7K2vBOS0bIyAQzccdCYymBk7SQdgLmxVqWfs7pDiczmoi6WIwljdGG//jD bhQn1d0e8OR+OSKMFx0ZxYJ4Mz+OisM= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-179-6FM-k7x8Mj2c74P_45QdLQ-1; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:04:36 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 6FM-k7x8Mj2c74P_45QdLQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD39F18C9F59; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:04:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-114-68.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.68]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F6C55DA2A; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 19:04:29 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: KVM call for agenda for 2020-10-06 Message-ID: <20201007180429.GI2505881@redhat.com> References: <874kndm1t3.fsf@secure.mitica> <20201005144615.GE5029@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <8fce8f99-56bd-6a87-9789-325d6ffff54d@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8fce8f99-56bd-6a87-9789-325d6ffff54d@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.6 (2020-07-11) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/07 00:54:30 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.742, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Kevin Wolf , Eduardo Habkost , kvm-devel , Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel , Markus Armbruster , John Snow Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 06/10/20 20:21, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > * Does command-line order matter? > > * Two options: allow any order OR left-to-right ordering > > * Andrea Bolognani: Most users expect left-to-right ordering, > > why allow any order? > > * Eduardo Habkost: Can we enforce left-to-right ordering or do > > we need to follow the deprecation process? > > * Daniel Berrange: Solve compability by introducing new > > binaries without the burden of backwards compability > > I think "new binaries" shouldn't even have a command line; all > configuration should happen through QMP commands. Those are naturally > time-ordered, which is equivalent to left-to-right, and therefore the > question is sidestepped. Perhaps even having a command line in > qemu-storage-daemon was a mistake. Non-interactive configuration is a nice property for simpler integration use cases. eg launching from the shell is tedious with QMP compared to CLI args. This could be addressed though by having a configuration file to load config from, where the config entries can be mapped 1-1 onto QMP commands, essentially making the config file a non-interactive QMP. > The big question to me is whether the configuration should be > QAPI-based, that is based on QAPI structs, or QMP-based. If the latter, > "object-add" (and to a lesser extent "device-add") are fine mechanisms > for configuration. There is still need for better QOM introspection, > but it would be much simpler than doing QOM object creation via QAPI > struct, if at all possible. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|