From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35941) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WrYtT-0004FC-T2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:31:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WrYtO-00057C-V3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:31:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48996) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WrYtO-00055L-N8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:31:38 -0400 Message-ID: <538CDF26.6040904@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:31:34 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20140530201145.194061806@amt.cnet> <20140602175104.579823673@amt.cnet> <20140602175345.235004414@amt.cnet> <538CD111.30604@redhat.com> <20140602202038.GA12036@amt.cnet> In-Reply-To: <20140602202038.GA12036@amt.cnet> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qI6v567El3MGRfGpSMUGiKNF4KIFTVQbV" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/3] mc146818rtc: add rtc_reset_reinjection QMP command List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Marcelo Tosatti Cc: gleb@kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, mprivozn@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --qI6v567El3MGRfGpSMUGiKNF4KIFTVQbV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 06/02/2014 02:20 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 01:31:29PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 06/02/2014 11:51 AM, mtosatti@redhat.com wrote: >>> It is necessary to reset RTC interrupt reinjection backlog if >>> guest time is synchronized via a different mechanism, such as=20 >>> QGA's guest-set-time command. >>> >>> + >>> +## >>> +# @: rtc-reset-reinjection >> >> s/: // to resemble most other commands >=20 > Several commands have ":". What is the correct syntax and why? Alas, we don't have any automated program that strips these stylized comments and turns them into formal documentation. But the goal is that some day we might, at which point, being consistent in our style is the most likely to be successful. The prevalent style appears to be: ## # @command: # # Short summary # # @foo: describe mandatory option foo # # @bar: #optional describe optional option bar, and its default value # if omitted # # Returns: what to expect from the command # # Since: version it was introduced ## { 'command' ... } Although I will admit that '@command' vs. '@command:' didn't have a clear winner. Maybe someone with OCD wants to do a pure cleanup patch to get the file into a consistent state? Until then, I'm pointing out where things are definitely different (your '@: command' was an outlier) >>> EQMP >>> + >>> +#if defined (TARGET_I386) >>> + { >>> + .name =3D "rtc_reset_reinjection", >> >> s/rtc_reset_reinjection/rtc-reset-reinjection/ >=20 > This is a function name. No, it is a QMP command name. See "send-key" for an example. --=20 Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --qI6v567El3MGRfGpSMUGiKNF4KIFTVQbV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJTjN8nAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nq66QIAIWTEvp8gC/lPaJavreml8Zm Djm/jpTVQxvPSf3KxzQQ2MDnu4Du74bH95EiwtNG93SQ2gh/UiR4guwZdlrSHOMl Um+qFS+rGAYXjaEdfpUa2GnFpHETvm1hiuSF2w04xZjiIu3M13WMPQlQhikuthCU LXfKn6eBdXluYxGjWfEhEFKWVdbrIG5kkTO6Egb8C7nNalZDVoOJhdb4h+lVo5iE j9QuagXVsipZLC+iGauq+Qn0YLg8qr/NPYFDDHZOmic9UWrl9O2aeusB/jyl7V6H 4t0E7l3fXa7rGK1Gbas7IrOYfyQZP8bBYOTNccOd8e61zbJQYjiaE3deeNFxuxw= =tD0b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qI6v567El3MGRfGpSMUGiKNF4KIFTVQbV--