qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 13/17] monitor: Allow to exclude commands fro


From: Luiz Capitulino
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 13/17] monitor: Allow to exclude commands from QMP
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 10:45:16 -0300

On Fri, 28 May 2010 00:20:08 +0200
Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> wrote:

> Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 May 2010 12:59:26 +0200
> > Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: Jan Kiszka <address@hidden>
> >>
> >> Ported commands that are marked 'user_only' will not be considered for
> >> QMP monitor sessions. This allows to implement new commands that do not
> >> (yet) provide a sufficiently stable interface for QMP use (e.g.
> >> device_show).
> > 
> >  This is fine for me, but two things I've been wondering:
> > 
> >  1. Isn't a 'flags' struct member better? So that we can do (in the
> >     qemu-monitor.hx entry):
> > 
> >         .flags = MONITOR_USER_ONLY | MONITOR_HANDLER_ASYNC,
> > 
> >     I'm not suggesting this is an async handler, just exemplifying multiple
> >     flags.
> 
> Yes, can refactor this.
> 
> > 
> >   2. Getting QMP handlers right in the first time might be difficult, so
> >      we could have a way to mark them unstable. Maybe a different namespace
> >      which is only enabled at configure time with:
> > 
> >          --enable-qmp-unstable-commands
> > 
> >      If this were possible, we could have device_show and any command we
> >      aren't sure is QMP-ready working in QMP this way.
> 
> Do you suggest this as an alternative to this patch? Or an extension
> later on? I have no opinion on this yet, I would just like to know how
> to proceed for this series.

 Both can be done worked later, as this is internal there's no problem in
living with a simpler solution for a while.



reply via email to

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