On 04/25/2010 09:50 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/23/2010 09:33 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> This is a different ambiguity, about the semantic results of the
>> commands,
>> where as I'm refering to the execution order. If I look at a libvirt
>> log
>> file and see a set of JSON commands logged, I want to know that this
>> ordering
>> from the logs, was indeed the same as order in which qemu processed
>> them. If
>> you have two separate monitor connection you can't be sure of the
>> order of
>> execution. It is key for our bug troubleshooting that given a
>> libvirt log
>> file, we can replay the JSON commands again and get the same
>> results. Two
>> monitor connections is just increasing complexity of code without any
>> tangible benefit.
>
> I think you're assuming direct access to the second monitor? I'm not
> suggesting that. I'm suggesting that libvirt is still the one
> submitting commands to the second monitor and that it submits those
> commands in lock step.
>
What about protocol extensions? For instance, pretend libvirt doesn't
support async messages, what would it do when it receives one from the
user's monitor?
Protocol extensions could not be supported in this model. I agree,
that's unfortunate.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori