On Wed, 2019-03-06 at 09:30 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 08:41:48AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 16:56:43 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > So I agree neither scenario is exactly perfect, but I still think
> > adding non-transitional alias devices would overall be more
> > user-friendly.
>
> I don't think it makes sense to add it at the qemu level. From libvirt's
> point of view users should be shielded from any qemu impl detail or
> inconsistency as libvirt is the 'user friendly'[1] layer. In qemu the
> devices would be the same and thus does not make sense to do that
> because it would be more confusing.
>
> You can argue that we should add the alias at the libvirt level though.
You can, but please don't.
It would seem nobody except me thinks this is a good idea, so I
guess I'll just drop it now.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization