Am 04.10.2012 16:30, schrieb Jan Kiszka: > On 2012-10-04 16:21, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> -no-kvm should be included too. > > Reminds me that we still need to agree on the final default accel strategy. > >> >> I just ran across a user that was injecting '-no-kvm-irqchip' in their >> libvirt XML via a custom attribute. It turned out it was to work around >> broken MSI support in their funky guest they were running. It was the >> wrong solution to the problem but they were doing it regardless. >> >> The point is, there are users in the wild using these options. There's >> no reason to remove them if they are trivial to maintain (and they are >> in their current form). > > So let's define a consistent policy for them all: > - warn on the command line on use > - avoid adding them to the help or other user documentation That's dangerous - at some point someone will notice and propose a patch documenting them and the reviewers may have forgotten by then why it was not documented in the first place. Better clearly document them in help output as "DEPRECATED, to be removed in future versions" or so. Andreas > - keep them until we rework the whole command line > > Jan > -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
