From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55557) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEiKv-0003ij-PX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:29:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEiKv-0005UK-1U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:29:53 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.161.173]:50760) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEiKu-0005U9-Tp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:29:53 -0400 Received: by gxk26 with SMTP id 26so271498gxk.4 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DB6C8CB.7030706@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:29:47 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4D74A8C9.2020408@cn.fujitsu.com> <4D74A974.6090509@cn.fujitsu.com> <20110404105949.GA30324@redhat.com> <4D99BF99.1040305@redhat.com> <4D99C22C.4070401@codemonkey.ws> <20110406144723.45333682@doriath> <4D9CAAF9.7000509@codemonkey.ws> <20110406150818.56707b9b@doriath> <4DAE7AF4.3050508@cn.fujitsu.com> <4DAFA34A.3030701@cn.fujitsu.com> <20110426102641.71a60d81@doriath> In-Reply-To: <20110426102641.71a60d81@doriath> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3 V8] QAPI: add inject-nmi qmp command List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Luiz Capitulino Cc: Lai Jiangshan , Lai Jiangshan , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity On 04/26/2011 08:26 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:23:54 +0800 > Lai Jiangshan wrote: > >> >> Hi, Anthony Liguori >> >> Any suggestion? >> >> Although all command line interfaces will be converted to to use QMP interfaces in 0.16, >> I hope inject-nmi come into QAPI earlier, 0.15. > > I don't know what Anthony thinks about adding new commands like this one that > early to the new QMP interface, but adding them to current QMP will certainly > cause less code churn on your side. That's what I'd recommend for now. Yeah, sorry, this whole series has been confused in the QAPI discussion. I did not intend for QAPI to be disruptive to current development. As far as I can tell, the last series that was posted (before the QAPI post) still had checkpatch.pl issues (scripts/checkpatch.pl btw) and we had agreed that once that was resolved, it would come in through Luiz's tree. Regards, Anthony Liguori