From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MKxGr-0007CK-69
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:30:25 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MKxGq-0007AI-73
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:30:24 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50080 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MKxGq-00079k-1Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:30:24 -0400
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:8595)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1MKxGp-0000Qv-H8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:30:23 -0400
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so316969fgb.8
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:30:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4A4791D9.2050400@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1245730845.git.lcapitulino@redhat.com>
	<4A40DFCE.5050008@codemonkey.ws> <20090623135958.660903e1@doriath>
	<4A412135.2060804@us.ibm.com> <4A435F09.7050702@redhat.com>
	<20090625161143.01b56eea@doriath> <4A4492FD.4040704@redhat.com>
	<20090626094224.GE28206@redhat.com> <20090627125833.22d3cc9f@doriath>
	<4A4791D9.2050400@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 19:30:21 +0300
Message-ID: <f43fc5580906280930y356e7b86i65712d3c3db24aeb@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 08/11] QMP: Port balloon command
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, ehabkost@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>

On 6/28/09, 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.  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.

No, I think the trick is to have the mile-long patchset that twiddles
something in the block layer. It can potentially cause deadly bugs for
every guest and the benefit may not be obvious.