Re: [PATCHv3 04/11] Add virtio revision attribute to controllers

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

 



On 08/11/2016 11:11 AM, Ján Tomko wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:17:34AM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
On 08/11/2016 09:31 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 03:25:53PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 01:00:08PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 03:27:15PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
<controller type='scsi' index='0' model='virtio-scsi'>
     <virtio revision='0.9'/>
I'm wondering about generalizing this. eg what if there are
other device models where we want the ability to set a
revision. We don't really want to invent a new sub-elment
named after each device model
Not even a new attribute? :)
  <revision virtio='0.9'/>

How about:
  <revision type='virtio' version='0.9'/>
Both of those are quite repetative - we already know its virtio.

Most devices we have alrady include a <driver> or <model> sub-element,
so we should really just add a revision= attrbute to those existing
elements. For places which don't already have this we can add a new
<driver> element

Yeah, I was going to suggest <driver> as well.

The only thing missing would be the ability to specify multiple versions.


I think that's something we want to allow - didn't you mention somewhere
that 'disable-legacy=off,disable-modern=off' gets different results than
omitting it completely?

Yes, depending on the qemu version and which bus you plug it into.


Other than awkward enum values, it could be represented as a (rather
verbose) subelement:
<driver>
 <revision>0.9</revision>
 <revision>1.0</revision>

It's not rational, but I *hate* single value elements! They're just too redundant!

</driver>

Also, it does make the parsing and formatting a bit awkward, since
<driver> has different parse/format functions for each device that uses
it (necessary due to the difference in possible attributes).

That means more work for me, but should not be a factor when deciding
on better-looking XML.

Oh, I don't know - maintainability is important :-)



In spite of that, it would definitely look better from the outside.


Personally I liked the consistence of having the same element under each
device more (and the ability to have more of them), but putting it under
<driver>/<model> also has its beauty, if we can figure out how to
express multiple versions.

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]