Re: [PATCH v3 27/30] hmp: QAPIfy object_add

Am 15.03.2021 um 10:39 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com&gt; writes: > > > On 13/03/21 14:28, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> Kevin Wolf <kwolf(a)redhat.com&gt; writes: > >> > >>> This switches the HMP command object_add from a QemuOpts-based parser to > >>> user_creatable_add_from_str() which uses a keyval parser and enforces > >>> the QAPI schema. > >>> > >>> Apart from being a cleanup, this makes non-scalar properties and help > >>> accessible. In order for help to be printed to the monitor instead of > >>> stdout, the printf() calls in the help functions are changed to > >>> qemu_printf(). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> Acked-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> Reviewed-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> --- > >>> monitor/hmp-cmds.c | 17 ++--------------- > >>> qom/object_interfaces.c | 11 ++++++----- > >>> hmp-commands.hx | 2 +- > >>> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/monitor/hmp-cmds.c b/monitor/hmp-cmds.c > >>> index 3c88a4faef..652cf9ff21 100644 > >>> --- a/monitor/hmp-cmds.c > >>> +++ b/monitor/hmp-cmds.c > >>> @@ -1670,24 +1670,11 @@ void hmp_netdev_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) > >>> > >>> void hmp_object_add(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) > >>> { > >>> + const char *options = qdict_get_str(qdict, "object"); > >>> Error *err = NULL; > >>> - QemuOpts *opts; > >>> - Object *obj = NULL; > >>> - > >>> - opts = qemu_opts_from_qdict(qemu_find_opts("object"), qdict, &err); > >>> - if (err) { > >>> - goto end; > >>> - } > >>> > >>> - obj = user_creatable_add_opts(opts, &err); > >>> - qemu_opts_del(opts); > >>> - > >>> -end: > >>> + user_creatable_add_from_str(options, &err); > >>> hmp_handle_error(mon, err); > >>> - > >>> - if (obj) { > >>> - object_unref(obj); > >>> - } > >>> } > >> > >> Doesn't this break the list-valued properties (Memdev member host-nodes, > >> NumaNodeOptions member cpus) exactly the same way that made us keep > >> QemuOpts for qemu-system-FOO -object? > > > > Yes, it does. I guess it can just be documented, unlike for the command > > line? > > Maybe. Judgement call, not mine to make. > > Do people create such objects in HMP? I figure we don't really know. > Educated guess? > > If you try, how does it break? Is it confusing? Can you show an > example? (qemu) object_add memory-backend-ram,id=mem,size=4G,policy=bind,host-nodes=0 Error: Invalid parameter type for 'host-nodes', expected: array (qemu) object_add memory-backend-ram,id=mem,size=4G,policy=bind,host-nodes.0=0 (qemu) HMP is not a stable interface, so changing the syntax didn't feel like a problem to me. I doubt many people do HMP memory hotplug while setting a specific NUMA policy, but it wouldn't change my assessment anyway. I should have made this explicit in the commit message, though.

Kevin