From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35513) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NXS-00018A-Oy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:47:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NXN-0002Kk-T8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:47:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57242) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NXN-0002J8-NG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:47:45 -0400 References: <1508170976-96869-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1508170976-96869-5-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20171016165916.GI3246@localhost.localdomain> <4c14ed02-1f1c-a093-52ac-632f61a68a6f@redhat.com> <20171016171752.GK3246@localhost.localdomain> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <32f5d2bc-cf8f-727b-67bc-9611e9b6f7d0@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:47:40 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171016171752.GK3246@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 4/6] CLI: add -paused option List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: Igor Mammedov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, eblake@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, pkrempa@redhat.com, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, peter.maydell@linaro.org, cohuck@redhat.com On 16/10/2017 19:17, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> Should (or could) "-M none" be changed in a backwards-compatible way to >> allow such preconfiguration? For example >> >> qemu -M none -monitor stdio >> (qemu) machine-set-options pc,accel=kvm >> (qemu) c > Sounds like an interesting idea. It would require ensuring it's > really safe to destroy current_machine/accel (and other global > state) and replace them with another object on the fly (which is > probably a nice goal by itself). It is but, alternatively, you could delay creating the "none" machine until the last second. The important part, in my opinion, is having a good command-line interface that we can freeze even if the implementation below leaves something to be desired. Paolo