On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 12:29:58 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > On 1/12/21 12:19 PM, Peter Krempa wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 09:29:49 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > > > This capability tracks whether memory-backend-file has > > > "x-use-canonical-path-for-ramblock-id" attribute. Introduced into > > > QEMU by commit v4.0.0-rc0~189^2. While "x-" prefix is considered > > > > Please use a commit hash instead of this. > > > > > experimental or internal to QEMU, the next commit justifies its > > > use. > > > > NACK unless qemu adds a statement to their code and documentation that > > the this property is considered stable despite the 'x-prefix' and you > > add a link to the appropriate qemu upstream commit once it's done. > > > > We don't want to depend on experimental stuff so we need a strong > > excuse. > > > > That's done in the next commit. Do you want me to copy it here too? I > figured I'd put the justification where I'm actually setting the internal > knob. Yes, because this is also mentioning the an 'x-' prefixed property. I want to be absolutely clear in any places (including a comment in the code, which you also should add into the capability code) that this is extraordinary circumstance and that qemu is actually considering that property stable. I want to prevent that this commit will be used as an excuse to depend on experimental properties which are not actually considered non-experimental.
