From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MJ6FI-000155-HI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:41:08 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MJ6FE-00014Q-TX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:41:08 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54222 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MJ6FE-00014N-PV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:41:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f211.google.com ([209.85.219.211]:65451) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MJ6FE-0003eY-E6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:41:04 -0400 Received: by ewy7 with SMTP id 7so103410ewy.34 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:41:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A40DB6A.8000106@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:40:58 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 01/11] QMP: Introduce specification file References: <20090623012811.53a62493@doriath> <4A40989C.1050805@redhat.com> <4A40D4C1.4040608@codemonkey.ws> <4A40D8F8.4050508@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4A40D8F8.4050508@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, ehabkost@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/23/2009 04:12 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Hi Luiz, >> >> The specification looks pretty good. >> >> >>>> + >>>> +3.3.1 Server Greeting >>>> +--------------------- >>>> + >>>> +Sent when a new connection is opened. >>>> + >>>> +Format: + OK QEMU QMP >>>> +Example: + OK QEMU 0.10.50 QMP 0.1 >>> >>> Clients should never make decisions based on the qemu or qmp >>> version. Rather, we should provide a facility to query the >>> availability of features. >> >> I agree, but I'd suggest leaving the QMP version in there for >> insurance purposes in case we really screw up and need to bump the >> version. In fact, having the client also negotiate the QMP version >> isn't a bad idea. > > Agreed. > >> How would asynchronous commands work? > > IMO, there aren't any. All commands are synchronous (but may cause > events to be generated later). At least today, there are quite a few commands that are synchronous and block. They would all have to be converted to events. For instance: commit change screendump savevm loadvm delvm stop cont memsave pmemsave migrate balloon Regards, Anthony Liguori