From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42410) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5HEW-0005QV-Et for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:34:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5HES-000080-7X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:34:40 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-x22c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]:35923) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5HES-00007R-3K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:34:36 -0400 Received: by qkfe185 with SMTP id e185so30110338qkf.3 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 10:34:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Slutz Message-ID: <5581AFA9.1090802@Gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:34:33 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1434117956-4929-1-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com> <20150617160826-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <558180A0.8040708@redhat.com> <20150617161716-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <558183C1.3010402@redhat.com> <20150617162836-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <55819D8F.3000003@redhat.com> <20150617182322-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <5581A844.9090203@Gmail.com> <5581AAF0.3000307@redhat.com> <5581AD8C.40202@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5581AD8C.40202@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 0/9] Add limited support of VMware's hyper-call rpc List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Don Slutz , Luiz Capitulino , Anthony Liguori , =?windows-1252?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= , Richard Henderson On 06/17/15 13:25, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 17/06/2015 19:14, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 17/06/2015 19:03, Don Slutz wrote: >>> On 06/17/15 12:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 06:17:19PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 17/06/2015 16:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 04:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 17/06/2015 16:18, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's what was done for parallel and pcspk as well. There's no >>>>>>>>>> infrastructure to avoid it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>> How do you mean? We have multiple ways to keep devices >>>>>>>> compatible with old versions. >>>>>>>> Set a new property to skip the extra stuff. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not if the device didn't have a vmstate at all, unfortunately. >>>>>> >>>>>> Skip creating the device completely for old machine types. >>>>> >>>>> Which device? The vmstate is tied to the same device that has always >>>>> been created. >>>> >>>> Just disable the new functionality. Make it behave in >>>> a compatible way. >>>> >>>>> we enable this thing by default (why do we?) >>>> >>>> Sigh. There is a very simple way to add a device in qemu: let user >>>> request it with -device. If one does this, one gets to maintain the >>>> resulting mess without bothering with pc maintainers in any way. >>>> >>>> But of course, everyone implementing a new feature feels it's such a >>>> great thing, and completel zero risk, it must be part of the default >>>> machine. Guess what, one then gets to bother with versioning from day 0. >>>> >>>>>>>> this seems like a big deal ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The PC speaker device is also enabled by default. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is historical, isn't it? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, but it has broken 2.3->2.2 migration. >>>>> >>>>> Let's just stop fighting windmills. >>>>> >>>>> Paolo >>>> >>>> I don't see what you are saying. Suddenly guest visible >>>> changes within a machine type are ok? >>>> >>>> So we have a bug, need to fix it, preferably before piling up >>>> more features. The best way imho is for 2.4 to avoid >>>> this device unless requested explicitly. >>>> >>> >>> My take on this is that Michael would like me to have a vmport_rpc=on >>> option, just like vmport=on (which already exists). With a default of off. >> >> It wouldn't be enough, because dc->vmsd would be non-NULL anyway. >> >> (But yes, that option would be a good thing anyway). > > Even better would be to have a "-global vmport.rpc=no" option. It would > be simpler to disable it in existing machine types. > Either way I can avoid the device creation... Unless I hear otherwise I will go the global way. Since the default would be no, should I also make the default =yes for the 2.4 pc? -Don Slutz -Don Slutz > Paolo >