From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50566) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QkAON-0007vs-5R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 03:43:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QkAOL-0007BX-SB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 03:43:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28399) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QkAOL-0007BR-Id for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 03:43:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4E292AC9.5080200@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 09:46:17 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E259F6E.8000204@us.ibm.com> <4E2824D2.2050401@redhat.com> <4E2827A2.6010603@us.ibm.com> <4E282BE3.1050404@redhat.com> <4E283C90.8010806@us.ibm.com> <4E283FFE.6090201@redhat.com> <4E28497C.5010801@us.ibm.com> <4E284C74.2010708@redhat.com> <4E285492.1070006@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4E285492.1070006@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] QEMU Object Model List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Markus Armbruster , Anthony Liguori , Avi Kivity , qemu-devel Am 21.07.2011 18:32, schrieb Anthony Liguori: > Just as we're now realizing that we need to do dramatic things in the > block layer to make -blockdev work, I'm sure we're going to realize that > we want to do PCI hotplug of virtio-serial and therefore we need to do > dynamic creation/destruction of character devices. Just to have it said: -blockdev isn't the reason for doing something like this. The reason is that you want it. (Not saying anything about whether it is a good or a bad thing to want) What -blockdev really needs is an additional parameter to bdrv_open that carries the options. Could be as simple as a QDict, though that might not align well with your QAPI which wants everything to be C. But in any case, generalising the qdev properties mechanism to be usable in other contexts should be enough for anything. There's really no pressing need to start yet another rewrite of half of qemu just for -blockdev. And in turn -blockdev doesn't have to wait for such a rewrite. Kevin