qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU configuration files


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU configuration files
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:08:14 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501)

Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Hi,

My snapshot of the "object based" QEMU configuration system can be found at http://bellard.org/qemu/patches . I only tried it for x86 targets. It is not yet in committable state and comments are welcome !

I've only done a very quick high level review. I'll try to do a more thorough one soon. My first impressions are very positive. I think it would be better to decentralize class registration but I don't think that's a very hard change to make.

General ideas:

- User preferences and machine definitions are separated. User preferences are in ~/.qemu/config for Unix systems. Machine definitions can override user preferences but I believe it should be the exception.

Ack.  I think this is pretty important.

- Command line options override the user preferences and machine definitions.

- Machine definitions contain machine parameters and device definitions. Device definitions are used to create new devices not instanciated in the hardcoded machine definition such as PCI and USB devices.

There are many details which need clarification, in particular:

- PCI, IDE, SCSI and buses naming. It is important if we want to be able to dynamically instantiate complicated bus topologies.
- USB port naming
- Is it worth specifying board specific network controllers as separate devices (I tried to do that for smc91c111 devices) ? A simpler solution would be to add new machine parameters to do that. - It would be logical to define QEMUDevice for every instanciated device and that register_savevm() use QEMUDevice as parameter, but it requires more changes in the code.

Indeed. QEMUDevice is a good abstraction as it can be also be used to introduce per-device locking which will help parallelize things with KVM.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

- Is it worth handling class defaults parameters ? I find the current implementation too complicated.

Fabrice.








reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]