From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37915 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGqDI-0002yX-Kf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 05:14:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OGqDH-00080G-Jw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 05:14:16 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1154)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OGqDH-0007zy-D4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 05:14:15 -0400
Message-ID: <4BFB94D9.5080904@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 12:14:01 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] ceph/rbd block driver for qemu-kvm
References: <20100519192222.GD61706@ncolin.muc.de>	
	<AANLkTimXqk7oa4mtcoHX1rKWzi_Nccb0FJu_QDtwJ-sP@mail.gmail.com>	
	<AANLkTil-aogxdnMallKTDo1bKXj6QmaU0ojJuiZgXaqC@mail.gmail.com>	
	<4BF5A9D2.5080609@codemonkey.ws> <4BF91937.2070801@redhat.com>	
	<87wrutg4dk.wl%morita.kazutaka@lab.ntt.co.jp>	
	<4BFA5D96.3030603@redhat.com>	
	<lpvdad4jcf.wl%morita.kazutaka@lab.ntt.co.jp>	
	<4BFA696D.2060606@redhat.com>	
	<lphblxiele.wl%morita.kazutaka@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<AANLkTilHGvaCDjeRSG3al2GOC7ts9uXGZ9DOGwBU5MEy@mail.gmail.com>
	<4BFAD59E.2010706@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4BFAD59E.2010706@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brunner <chb@muc.de>, MORITA Kazutaka <morita.kazutaka@lab.ntt.co.jp>

On 05/24/2010 10:38 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> - Building a plugin API seems a bit simpler to me, although I'm to
>> sure if I'd get the
>>    idea correctly:
>>    The block layer has already some kind of api (.bdrv_file_open, 
>> .bdrv_read). We
>>    could simply compile the block-drivers as shared objects and 
>> create a method
>>    for loading the necessary modules at runtime.
>
> That approach would be a recipe for disaster.   We would have to 
> introduce a new, reduced functionality block API that was supported 
> for plugins.  Otherwise, the only way a plugin could keep up with our 
> API changes would be if it was in tree which defeats the purpose of 
> having plugins.

We could guarantee API/ABI stability in a stable branch but not across 
releases.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function