From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51174) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d5aLW-00050z-BB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 May 2017 12:08:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d5aLR-0000yZ-CM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 May 2017 12:08:14 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38710) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d5aLR-0000vX-5u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 May 2017 12:08:09 -0400 References: <1493719600-30853-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> <52fc3efd-55a7-af2d-ce8c-9b4565dfe6dc@de.ibm.com> <87pofrfgl3.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <93de273c-9a3b-dcb8-dd6e-8b9b4fb09a65@redhat.com> <176d87e9-d899-792f-536e-07cd6f5c7cb6@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 18:08:03 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <176d87e9-d899-792f-536e-07cd6f5c7cb6@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Deprecate '-enable-kvm' and '-enable-hax' in favour of '-accel' List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth , Markus Armbruster Cc: Christian Borntraeger , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Vincent Palatin On 02/05/2017 17:53, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> >>> What we've done before for options that have become unloved, but not >>> harmful, is remove them just from documentation. Grep qemu-options.h= x >>> for "HXCOMM Deprecated". Let's do that for --enable-kvm and similarl= y >>> weird sugared options. >> Except that this provides no easily greppable way to find how to enabl= e >> KVM, as things stand. > Should we then improve the description of the -accel parameter? Yes, having a list of accelerators would be useful. For example: -accel tcg[,threads=3Don|off] .... -accel kvm -accel hax -accel qtest >> So the first lesson should be "no deprecation >> without documentation" (any reference to 18th century political slogan= s >> is purely coincidential :)). > Would you accept my patch if I'd remove the hunks for vl.c, i.e. a patc= h > that just updates the documentation? No, updating the documentation is pointless if you don't improve it at the same time. I don't like writing it so often, especially to someone who is a relatively experienced contributor, but the common word in all these reviews is "pointless". What is the *purpose* of this work? I think a valid purpose would be to improve documentation, for example. Another would be to consolidate non-QemuOpts command-line options. For this, some options that are entirely internal provide interesting grounds for improvement. For example, "-qtest" and "qtest-log" could be consolidated in "-qtest [chardev=3D]chardev,log=3Dfile". Paolo