Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 11:03:51AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:03:51 +0100
>> From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/5] qapi/qom: Introduce kvm-pmu-filter object
>>
>> Quick & superficial review for now.
>
> Thanks!
>
>> > diff --git a/qapi/kvm.json b/qapi/kvm.json
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 000000000000..d51aeeba7cd8
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/qapi/kvm.json
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
>> > +# -*- Mode: Python -*-
>> > +# vim: filetype=python
>> > +
>> > +##
>> > +# = KVM based feature API
>>
>> This is a top-level section. It ends up between sections "QMP
>> introspection" and "QEMU Object Model (QOM)". Is this what we want? Or
>> should it be a sub-section of something? Or next to something else?
>
> Do you mean it's not in the right place in the qapi-schema.json?
>
> diff --git a/qapi/qapi-schema.json b/qapi/qapi-schema.json
> index b1581988e4eb..742818d16e45 100644
> --- a/qapi/qapi-schema.json
> +++ b/qapi/qapi-schema.json
> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@
> { 'include': 'compat.json' }
> { 'include': 'control.json' }
> { 'include': 'introspect.json' }
> +{ 'include': 'kvm.json' }
> { 'include': 'qom.json' }
> { 'include': 'qdev.json' }
> { 'include': 'machine-common.json' }
>
> Because qom.json includes kvm.json, so I have to place it before
> qom.json.
>
> It doesn't have any dependencies itself, so placing it in the previous
> position should be fine, where do you prefer?
Let's ignore how to place it for now, and focus on where we would *like*
to place it.
Is it related to anything other than ObjectType / ObjectOptions in the
QMP reference manual?
I guess qapi/kvm.json is for KVM-specific stuff in general, not just the
KVM PMU filter. Should we have a section for accelerator-specific
stuff, with subsections for the various accelerators?
[...]
