[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4] introduce vfio-user protocol specification
|
From: |
Stefan Hajnoczi |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v4] introduce vfio-user protocol specification |
|
Date: |
Fri, 30 Oct 2020 19:14:02 +0000 |
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:39 PM Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 2020, at 10:30 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:>
> > >
> > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 10:14:23AM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote:
> >>> On Sep 30, 2020, at 3:24 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 09:21:54AM -0700, John G Johnson wrote:
> >>>>> On Sep 29, 2020, at 3:37 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:58:37AM +0000, Thanos Makatos wrote:
> Per Daniel's response on the other fork of the thread, I think we can
> develop faster if we're not depending on qemu-devel. With the right
> set of maintainers on the project, there's arguably more flexibility
> in working at a restricted set of code. QEMU can then update the
> submodule when a "checkpoint" is ready.
Sure, if you are happy with the submodule approach that's great.
On the QEMU side the device name should have an "x-" prefix so it's
clear that the feature is experimental and subject to change. This way
there is no stability guarantee during development. Both the protocol
and command-line can be changed without introducing feature bits and
keeping backwards compatibility.
Stefan