qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 06/16] net: Remove vlan qdev property


From: Zhi Yong Wu
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 06/16] net: Remove vlan qdev property
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 22:15:55 +0800

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
> Il 09/06/2012 05:04, Zhi Yong Wu ha scritto:
>>>>> This commit looks suspicious because it removes a user-visible qdev
>>>>> property but we're trying to preserve backward compatibility.  This
>>>>> command-line will break:
>>>>>
>>>>> x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -net user,vlan=1 -device 
>>>>> virtio-net-pci,vlan=1
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of dropping the qdev_prop_vlan completely the
>>>>> hw/qdev-properties.c code needs to call net/hub.h external functions
>>>>> to implement equivalent functionality:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Setting the vlan=<id> property looks up the hub port and assigns
>>>>> the NICConf->peer field.
>>>>> 2. Getting the vlan property looks up the hub id (i.e. vlan id) given
>>>>> the peer.  If the peer is not a hub port the result is -1.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I wrote this patch I missed the big picture and forgot about
>>>>> backwards compatibility :(.
>>>>>
>> To be honest, i am concerned if anyone uses this syntax. Since the
>> feature will finally be discarded, i suggest that we don't support
>> this now. If someone complains this later, we can fix it. If nobody
>> complains, that is what we hope.
>
> I think you're missing the big picture of this series, which is exactly
> _not_ to discard the VLAN feature, but just to rewrite it in a better way.
Yeah, i know that this series are rewriting VLAN feature in one better way.

What i mean was that luiz and other some guys think that the -net
syntax should be completely removed.

>
> That said, I agree that this is a somewhat fringe usage; most people
> will use -net nic,model=virtio,vlan=1 rather than "-device".  We may get
Yes.
> by with dropping it.  I have no strong opinion either way.
>
> Paolo
>



-- 
Regards,

Zhi Yong Wu



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]