From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:32923)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1SFKps-0002pi-08
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 03:41:01 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1SFKpl-0007gA-Aa
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 03:40:55 -0400
Received: from mail-pb0-f45.google.com ([209.85.160.45]:60277)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1SFKpl-0007ft-1O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 03:40:49 -0400
Received: by pbcuo5 with SMTP id uo5so6761pbc.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 00:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F7BFAEB.7070000@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:40:27 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <m3hax0g9kt.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<4F7B610D.8000101@redhat.com> <20120404011843.GA2918@illuin>
In-Reply-To: <20120404011843.GA2918@illuin>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Dor Laor <dlaor@redhat.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto:
> Attacking the IDL/schema side first is the more rationale approach. From
> there we can potentially generate ASN.1 BER/DER visitors for the protocol
> side, or potentially even just vmstate bindings as a start. I've recently
> started looking into the latter... it's completely feasible, the only
> downside is it complicates the IDL due requiring support for a lot of
> what are very much vmstate-specific items, but it should be possible to
> do this in a manner where those annotations are self-contained and
> ignorable if we opted to replace vmstate-style declarations.

We can also keep the current vmstate descriptions, but access fields
from the automatically-generated visitors instead of struct fields.
This keeps the IDL simple.

Paolo