From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54270) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsLX0-0005Yk-Px for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:51:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsLWz-0000t4-Fp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:50:58 -0500 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:51044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsLWz-0000t0-8E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:50:57 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e34.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 15:50:56 -0700 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2FCB19D8041 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 15:50:52 -0700 (MST) Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r07MoqF8347270 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 15:50:52 -0700 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r07MopD5010395 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 15:50:52 -0700 From: Anthony Liguori In-Reply-To: <20130107221541.GC11305@redhat.com> References: <20121217154508.GA28712@redhat.com> <20121218110153.GC22586@redhat.com> <50D053CC.9040203@greensocs.com> <20121218132152.GB26110@redhat.com> <87vcb8g3bs.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <20130107205950.GD10575@redhat.com> <878v841ybl.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <20130107213729.GB11305@redhat.com> <87vcb8irw7.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <20130107221541.GC11305@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 16:50:44 -0600 Message-ID: <87r4lw1ubf.fsf@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v6 0/6] Virtio refactoring. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Peter Maydell , e.voevodin@samsung.com, mark.burton@greensocs.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, afaerber@suse.de, KONRAD =?utf-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYw==?= "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 03:51:04PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: >> >> > I guess you are saying we want to add bus= option to -net nic? >> >> I absolutely wouldn't object to that. >> >> But I can think of better solutions too. Like: >> >> -virtio-net ... >> >> Regards, >> >> Anthony Liguori > > for most people I think virtio is an implementation detail really. no? So what is it that people really want to do? Is tap an implementation detail? Should we just do -nics 4 and call it a day? I'm not being facetious, I really think we should approach it like this. We don't need to design our internal interfaces/abstractions such that they map 1-1 with command line arguments meant for normal users. Regards, Anthony Liguori > >> > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -- >> >> >> > MST