From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>,
Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] machine: add missing doc for memory-backend option
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 14:51:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210120145123.06a853bf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA843rP6rvktc0FSZEjK8C9E8h_5_PbCBUXYM4XJRE7KHQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 10:02:04 +0000
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 23:48, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add documentation for '-machine memory-backend' CLI option and
> > how to use it.
> >
> > And document that x-use-canonical-path-for-ramblock-id,
> > is considered to be stable to make sure it won't go away by accident.
>
> That's not what the x- prefix is supposed to mean.
> If we have an internal constraint that we mustn't delete
> the option in order to support some other must-be-stable
> interface (eg migration of some machines) we can document
> that in a comment,
that was in v1, and Peter asked for adding assurance to help/doc as well.
> but that doesn't mean that we should
> document to users that direct use of an x-prefix option
> is supported as a stable interface.
A concur, that we don't have to declare it as stable in help/doc,
but we still have to document x-use-canonical-path-for-ramblock-id=off
the so users would know how/when to use it in this particular case.
> Alternatively, if the option is really stable for direct
> use by users then we should commit to making it so by
> removing the x-.
Peter Maydell,
I think Peter Krempa already explained/pointed to discussion why
x-use-canonical-path-for-ramblock-id wasn't renamed.
So as I see options are:
1) keep x- prefix declare it as stable both in doc and comments (like in this patch)
add to commit message why we are keeping x-
2) keep x- prefix declare it as stable in comments only,
keep doc changes to explaining how/when to use it
add to commit message why we are keeping x-
3) rename/drop x- prefix and don't care about QEMU-5.0-5.2
(libvirt would use old syntax (-mem-path/mem-prealloc) for them
which also leads to => no virtiofs as it needs shared RAM that
new syntax with backend provides for main RAM)
Which one is acceptable to you?
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-20 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-14 23:46 [PATCH v2] machine: add missing doc for memory-backend option Igor Mammedov
2021-01-15 9:36 ` Michal Privoznik
2021-01-20 10:20 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-01-15 10:02 ` Peter Maydell
2021-01-15 10:43 ` Peter Krempa
2021-01-15 10:56 ` Peter Krempa
2021-01-20 13:51 ` Igor Mammedov [this message]
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=20210120145123.06a853bf@redhat.com \
--to=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=mprivozn@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=pkrempa@redhat.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).