From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MT9jT-0003UB-2T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:51 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MT9jO-0003SE-Da for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:50 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55954 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MT9jO-0003S9-8c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:46 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:60192) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MT9jN-0006FU-Qg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:46 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MT9jN-00015L-3v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:45 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6L7Pix5013560 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:25:44 -0400 Message-ID: <4A656D74.1010409@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:25:40 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/5] QemuOpts: framework for storing and parsing options. References: <1247756224-19219-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <1247756224-19219-5-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <4A602234.50208@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4A602234.50208@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 07/17/09 09:03, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Gerd Hoffmann schrieb: >> This stores device parameters in a better way than unparsed strings. >> >> New types: >> QemuOpt - one key-value pair. >> QemuOpts - group of key-value pairs, belonging to one >> device, i.e. one drive. >> QemuOptsList - list of some kind of devices, i.e. all drives. > > What about having the options typed like I did in qemu-option.[ch]? Oh, I didn't see that. I just looked at the (old) parsing code in vl.c uses by almost everybody. > In general qemu-option seems to do more parsing/checking than QemuOpts > does, on the other hand it's not yet generic enough to suit everything. > Maybe a combination of both would be the right thing? I'll have a closer look. Who uses qemu-options? qemu-io I assume? cheers, Gerd