From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60908 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OLfYi-0003FJ-Kg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:52:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLfYh-0003kq-8E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:52:20 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:46422) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLfYh-0003kV-3I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:52:19 -0400 Received: by iwn41 with SMTP id 41so3708269iwn.4 for ; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:52:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C0D23B5.3050605@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 11:52:05 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: add an option to disable vlans References: <20100607150309.GA13369@redhat.com> <201006071716.31103.paul@codesourcery.com> <20100607161730.GB11177@redhat.com> <201006071742.56312.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201006071742.56312.paul@codesourcery.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: Paul Brook Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" On 06/07/2010 11:42 AM, Paul Brook wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 05:16:30PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote: >> >>>> With -netdev, there now seems to be little need to support vlans, >>>> enabling them leads to user confusion and bad performance. >>>> Disable support for vlans by default, add config option to enable. >>>> >>> No. If you want to remove vlans, then actually do that. >>> >> How is this not what this patch does? You mean kill the code >> completely, not just --contigure option? >> > Yes. Configure options are bad. If code isn't worth enabling by default then > you've got to have a very good reason why it exists at all. > Configure options are bad except when they are good. Distributions don't want to support every possible bell and whistle that qemu supports. By having configuration options upstream, we ensure that everyone is consistently disabling thing in the same fashion and that the interfaces presented to the users are consistent. I certainly believe that we should not disable features by default. But I think it's important that we support disabling features from a downstream supportability perspective. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Paul > >