Re: [Qemu-devel] Should we auto-generate IDs?

[Programmingkid]

On Aug 26, 2015, at 6:08 PM, John Snow wrote:

> 
> 
> On 08/26/2015 05:48 PM, Programmingkid wrote:
>> 
>> On Aug 26, 2015, at 2:45 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> 
>>> On 26 August 2015 at 18:16, Programmingkid <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> That is assuming they have the time and/or the interest in solving this 
>>>> problem. I
>>>> suppose giving them some time to respond would be reasonable. I'm thinking 
>>>> if
>>>> no consensus has been reached in one weeks time (starting today), we turn 
>>>> to
>>>> Peter Maydell for the answer. Hopefully he will just pick which of the 
>>>> patches he
>>>> likes the best. Judging by how long this problem has been ongoing, someone
>>>> pick the answer is probably the best we can expect.
>>> 
>>> This is the kind of thing I strongly prefer to leave to the
>>> relevant subsystem maintainer(s). My opinion is not worth
>>> a great deal since I don't have a strong familiarity with
>>> this bit of QEMU.
>> 
>> It looks unreasonable to assume any consensus can be reached over this issue.
>> The easy thing to do is to just let each maintainer deal with this problem
>> his own way. 
>> 
> 
> What feedback was there that seemed insurmountable? Last I talked to
> Jeff Cody he said there was no "overwhelming pushback" against his
> patches, just a list of concerns.

Markus Armbruster sent me four different threads each trying to solve this 
problem.
Some of those threads were many years old. The situation is the same then as it
is now. There is no judicator to decide how this problem is to be solved. 
Expecting
all the maintainers to agree on one patch is unrealistic. 

> This doesn't sound like a dead end so much as it sounds like we haven't
> planned the feature enough yet.

The threads did have some really good patches that did seem to solve the 
problem.
I could send you the threads if you haven't read them yet.

> 
>> Markus:
>> I know you really wanted a single ID generating system, but it just isn't 
>> going
>> to happen. I will make a patch that would only effect USB devices. All other
>> devices would be untouched. At least the device_del problem will be solved.
>> 
> 
> I think this is being unnecessarily hasty. We should make sure that an
> auto-generated ID system does not create problems for other areas of
> code before we rush ahead with one to solve a single problem.

I would make sure my patch only affects USB devices. No other systems
would be affected. 

> Let's give the universal approach some more time before we jump to the
> conclusion that it's impossible.

I suppose 5 more years will do ;)

Maybe that's too soon...