[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] fw_cfg: RFQDN rules, documentation

From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] fw_cfg: RFQDN rules, documentation
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:39:07 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

"Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 06:19:55PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> writes:
>> > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:59:35AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> >> If we can protect them without
>> >> complicating or breaking stuff, sure, why not.  But not at all costs.
>> >
>> > The stuff we break is precisely the stuff our warnings
>> > say might break at any time. So since you believe users
>> > might be relied on not to ignore warnings, it should be ok ...
>> >
>> > As for complicating things - about 5 lines of code are spent
>> > on the unsupported/root/ hack. It *is* a hack but
>> > contained enough not to worry me too much ...
>> I'm not worried about the implementation complexity at all.  It's the
>> user interface complexity.  After this patch, we have a non-trivial
>> mapping from -fw_cfg name to FW_CFG filename to explain.  Whereas now,
>> -fw_cfg name *is* the FW_CFG path.
> Only for people who ignore the rules. Most people have a trivial
> mapping.

Even when most usage falls into the simple cases, you still have to
explain all cases.

An interface's complexity is a property of the interface, not of its

reply via email to

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