From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44456) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAOTa-0003hG-SU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:33:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAOTV-0004cA-LY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:33:30 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.213.45]:54134) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAOTV-0004bW-HX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:33:25 -0400 Received: by yhoo21 with SMTP id o21so1318048yho.4 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F6A02D1.9060404@codemonkey.ws> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:33:21 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1332133163-7890-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <20120319113310.GD30033@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain> <20120320004206.GB22089@truffala.fritz.box> <20120320101947.GA19542@truffala.fritz.box> <20120321112615.GA15090@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain> <20120321130852.GC21467@redhat.com> <4F69E8E1.8050004@codemonkey.ws> <20120321151043.GA22707@redhat.com> <4F69F05B.5010500@codemonkey.ws> <20120321161155.GA23460@redhat.com> <4F6A014A.90704@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4F6A014A.90704@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Remove PCI class code from virtio balloon device List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Rusty Russell , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 03/21/2012 11:26 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 03/21/2012 11:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> Frankly I don't see value in making it visible to the user, >> at all. We are just triggering windows reactivations >> without any user benefit. Why not return a fixed value there >> to avoid that? > > I don't see a problem making it fixed for 1.1, but for 1.0 and older, we should > expose what we were supposed to expose. > > We need to fix the bug first, then we can change the behavior. In some cases, like USB, we really do want to expose a version, but we should probably only expose the major version, for instance, QEMU 1.x or 2.x. This would only be exposed by the appropriate machine types. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >> >>>>>> >>>>>> > >