From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 410E21FF176 for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 11:00:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7100817BC7; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 11:00:37 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <fe820c37-c0fe-4035-b94b-9d35d30529d2@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 11:00:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> References: <20250306104459.1272297-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20250306104459.1272297-3-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <0e5bf049-0f93-423f-b1b2-c14617f3fb40@proxmox.com> <bf081277-b97e-4bcf-b90f-8737e873d038@proxmox.com> <02f3ba81-41a4-4f92-a955-067d196ef489@proxmox.com> <45759946-092e-4b89-bcdb-ec6edc082e11@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <45759946-092e-4b89-bcdb-ec6edc082e11@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.042 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 2/8] config to command: add one '-global' option for each flag X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> Am 07.03.25 um 10:54 schrieb Dominik Csapak: > On 3/6/25 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote: >> Am 06.03.25 um 13:15 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >>> On 3/6/25 13:13, Fiona Ebner wrote: >>>> Am 06.03.25 um 11:44 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >>>>> If we have multiple 'globalFlags', we have to encode each one >>>>> separately >>>>> on the commandline with '-global OPTION', since QEMU does not allow to >>>>> have multiple options here. >>>>> >>>>> We currently only have one such flag that used the 'globalFlags' list, >>>>> so it never popped up. (All other uses directly add an option to the >>>>> commandline) >>>>> >>>>> Avoid future bugs by fixing it now. >>>>> >>>> >>>> So there is no real point to collecting the flags in the first place? >>>> I.e. we could also get rid of the variable and have the single current >>>> user of the variable add the flag directly on the commandline too. Or >>>> otherwise, we could change the other users and collect all flags with >>>> this variable. Pre-existing of course, but ideally, we could avoid the >>>> mishmash. >>>> >>> >>> Sorry this could have been more clear here: >>> I add to the flags in one of the following patches, so i sent this >>> in preparation of that (could possibly be squashed) >> >> Yes, I understand that. I still think the status quo with mixing two >> different approaches might not be best. It's not going to be a blocker >> for the series, but I wanted to mention it, if you want to go for >> avoiding it. >> >>> I did not want to touch the other places, since that in turn changes >>> the order of the qemu commandline (which sometimes has unintended side >>> effects, e.g. in combination with the 'args' parameter) >> >> Are you sure? Custom 'args' are always added last so that shouldn't >> matter. >> >> The only thing that would change by removing the global flags variable >> is having "-global kvm-pit.lost_tick_policy=discard" earlier in the >> commandline. I think that should be fine. In particular QEMU's >> qemu_init() function has a call to user_register_global_props() which >> handles all global properties at the same time, so I think changing the >> order should be fine in (almost?) all cases. > > I'll test that, but imho it would better to do the reverse here? > So don't interject '-gloabl' parameters throughout config2command, but > add them to the globalFlags and output them together at the end? > > we'd have to touch the same number of tests i think, but it seems less > confusing to me (also in the resulting commandline we'd have all > global options together then) > > Or is there a better argument for injecting the global parameters > in the middle? It avoids the need for the variable to collect and passing it around and to remember adding future ones to that variable too. It doesn't make a difference from QEMUs perspective, but would slightly improve readability for humans looking at the commandline. Note that I already suggested collecting all in the variable as an approach above. I just want to avoid the mishmash. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel