From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/8]: QMP feature negotiation support
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:03:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m37hqwf4iz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100201175004.5b1b5cc8@doriath> (Luiz Capitulino's message of "Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:50:04 -0200")
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:37:41 +0100
> Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:08:27 +0100
>> > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
[...]
>> >> I don't doubt your design does the job. I just think it's overly
>> >> general. I had something far more stupid in mind:
>> >>
>> >> client connects
>> >> server -> client: version & capability offer (one message)
>> >> again:
>> >> client -> server: capability selection (one message)
>> >> server -> client: either okay or error (one message)
>> >> if error goto again
>> >> connection is now ready for commands
>> >>
>> >> No modes. The distinct lack of generality is a design feature.
>> >
>> > I like the simplicity and if we were allowed to change later I'd
>> > do it.
>> >
>> > The question is if we will ever want features to be _configured_
>> > before the protocol is operational. In this case we'd need to
>> > pass feature arguments through the capability selection command,
>> > which will get ugly and hard to use/understand.
>> >
>> > Mode oriented support doesn't have this limitation. Maybe we
>> > won't never really use it, but it's safer.
>>
>> Capability selection could be done as an object where the name/value
>> pairs are capability/argument. If you need multiple arguments for a
>> capability, make the capability's value an object.
>
> That's exactly what seems complicated to me, because besides performing
> two functions (enable/configure) some feature setup could require
> more commands to be done in a clear way.
What do you mean by "feature setup"? And how does it go beyond setting
a bunch of parameters?
> The async messages setup in the previous series was an example of this.
I don't remember the details. Could you summarize?
> As said we might never use this, but I wouldn't like to regret later.
A somewhat plausible example for how it could be needed would help.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-02 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-28 13:42 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/8]: QMP feature negotiation support Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/8] QMP: Initial mode-oriented support Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-01 17:08 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/8] QMP: Introduce 'query-qmp-mode' command Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/8] QError: Add QMP mode-oriented errors Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 22:49 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-01-29 0:38 ` Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-01 17:03 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/8] QMP: Introduce qmp_switch_mode command Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-01 17:04 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-02-01 18:11 ` Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/8] QMP: Introduce qmp_capability_enable/disable Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/8] Monitor: Introduce find_info_cmd() Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/8] QMP: Enable feature negotiation support Luiz Capitulino
2010-01-28 13:43 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 8/8] QMP: spec: Feature negotiation related changes Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-01 17:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/8]: QMP feature negotiation support Markus Armbruster
2010-02-01 18:22 ` Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-01 19:37 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-02-01 19:50 ` Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-02 8:03 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2010-02-02 12:12 ` Luiz Capitulino
2010-02-02 14:48 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-02-03 18:34 ` Anthony Liguori
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m37hqwf4iz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=lcapitulino@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).