On 04/25/18 21:12, Eric Blake wrote: > On 04/25/2018 08:20 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >> ... >> >> and people would ask themselves ever after, "are there some common >> fields in there that we could extract ... hmmm, @props and @arch, okay, >> maybe, maybe not, grey area". Let's do it now and save them the thinking. > > No, CpuInfo is slated for death in the next year or so; per commit > ff9a9156. Once it disappears (in 2.14 or 2.15?), we will ONLY have > CpuInfoFast (although we might rename it at that time, as the name of > QMP structs is not part of the introspection interface). > > So, my personal inclination is to just live with the mindless > near-duplication until the deprecation period ends, rather than wasting > cycles refactoring things just to refactor it back out when removing the > dead code later. >
This is an important update; thank you for it. Because, it tells me that we might not need to add @target to CpuInfo at all. Why *extend* an interface that is deprecated to the point that we're reluctant even to *refactor* it? (BTW, I had noticed the deprecation note in the schema source code, from what you've now identified as commit ff9a9156; I didn't know what it meant -- I didn't know it carried a removal sentence.) The consequence is that I could drop the painful modifications for qmp_query_cpus() altogether, and just keep the simple ones for qmp_query_cpus_fast(). Markus, does that work for you? Forget about @CpuInfo for good? Thanks, Laszlo
