Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for May 18

[Luiz Capitulino]

On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:41 +0100
"Daniel P. Berrange" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > >On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > >   
> > >>On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
> > >>     
> > >>>Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
> > >>>
> > >>>If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
> > >>>
> > >>>       
> > >>- Slipping 0.13 release out to July 1st.
> > >>     
> > >What is the plan wrt QMP and 0.13 ? Is the intention to have 100%[1] of the
> > >existing monitor commands converted to QMP?
> > 
> > No.  I don't think our goal is to ever fully convert monitor commands to 
> > QMP.  Some commands simply don't make sense as QMP commands (like x and xp).
> 
> We're a really long way from a complete conversion even  ignoring 
> commands which don't make sense in QMP. The current state almost 
> covers the commands libvirt currently uses, but there's much more 
> beyond that.

 As far as I understood it, the plan for the first QMP release has always
been to only convert the subset of commands relevant/used by libvirt.

 We've been trying to figure out this set for a long time.

> > Is there a set of commands that you think need to be converted that 
> > currently aren't?
> 
> Notable outstanding commands that libvirt has a non-negligable
> chance of wanting to use in the not too distant future
> 
>  - blockdev_add/del (to replace drive_add/del)

 Markus is working on this.

>  - commit/delvm/loadvm/savevm

 I did a first try, but errors in those handlers are a mess and didn't
map well to QMP. I think QError improvements are needed to get this done.

>  - screendump
>  - set_link

 Both already converted.

>  - mouse_{move,button,set}
>  - sendkey
>  - acl_{add,remove,policy,reset,show}
>  - boot_set
>  - watchdog_action

 Not converted and I'm not sure how hard they are.

> The full list of unconverted commands though is much long:

[...]

> I don't think we can claim all those are irrelevant for QMP.
> 
> So are we still targetting complete conversion of relevant commands
> for 0.13, or is it just going to be a stepping stone where declare 
> QMP stable, but known to be incomplete for coverage of commands ?

 The first thing to do is to agree on what a 'complete coverage' would be,
what we have been trying to do since January is to provide a complete set
for libvirt, our unique well known client so far.

 Apart from the 'outstanding' set above, can you elaborate on how
QMP on 0.13 would not satisfy libvirt needs?