From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NeTYt-0005fd-12 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:21:59 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59149 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NeTYs-0005ec-0Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:21:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NeTYq-0008CH-7v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:21:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17287) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NeTYp-0008Bf-ME for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:21:56 -0500 Message-ID: <4B700FE7.7020009@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:21:43 +0100 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add assignment operation to config file parser.. References: <4B672535.5050303@redhat.com> <4B6DBC01.4060307@redhat.com> <4B6EE93F.3030406@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4B6EE93F.3030406@codemonkey.ws> 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: Anthony Liguori Cc: john cooper , "Przywara, Andre" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, KVM list , Mark McLoughlin On 02/07/10 17:24, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 02/06/2010 12:59 PM, john cooper wrote: >> This patch reworks support for both assignment and >> append in the config file parser. It was motivated >> by comments received on the cpu model config file >> format. >> >> Commit dc9ca4ba27be4fe6a0284061b8f056c4364fb0d9 >> changed the behavior of "=" from assign to append. >> This patch preserves the ability to append to an >> option (however now via "+="), reverts "=" to its >> previous behavior, and allows both to interoperate. >> >> Signed-off-by: john cooper > > This deviates from standard ini syntax which makes me a big > uncomfortable with it. Gerd, do you have an opinion? Also it the syntax change will break existing users of the append feature (host/guestfwd for slirp networking). Any reason why you can't use the current append to avoid the overlong feature flag lines? Another idea: One could reference other processors "base", then you can define a -- say -- Opteron_G3 as "Opteron_G2 features plus these". cheers, Gerd