Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 08/11] QMP: Port balloon command

[Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/27/2009 06:58 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>
>>  So, IMHO both solutions (QMP and JSON) solves the problem and I
>> would work on either one. I just would like that Anthony and Avi
>> get in agreement, because the project will fail if it becomes
>> one more difference between qemu and qemu-kvm.
>>
>
> There's no danger of a diverging implementation in this case since no one is
> proposing to have different monitor protocols.  We just need to find the
> best protocol.  Anthony's looking for minimal churn for the existing monitor
> command set and for libvirt, while I am considering the additional effort
> for new commands and for new clients.

I'm with Avi on this issue, but I will be happy as long as the
protocol is precisely described and extensible for future. Moreover I
believe that converting the current code to use a new function like
monitor_print_data could be done now even without knowing the exact
details of the on-wire protocol. The monitor_print_data function could
be then adjusted to understand the protocol specifics and emit the
data accordingly.

> It really isn't very complicated, and
> the thread only got so long because the topic is relatively simple.  Post an
> RFC and a mile-long patchset about changing TCG to SSA form, and see how you
> get no replies.

I wouldn't even dare to push the SSA patch... Mile-long doesn't
describe it precisely enough. Imagine it was applied to all the
targets.

F.

 target-arm/translate.c | 3846 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 tcg/tcg.c              |  327 +++-
 tcg/tcg.h              |    2 +-
 tcg/tcg-op.h           | 1614 ++++++++++++-------

 4 files changed, 3483 insertions(+), 2306 deletions(-)