On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:24:59AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:09:00PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 03:36:14PM +0000, Ani Sinha wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 17, 2020, at 8:57 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Is there a real reason to do this? Can't we just limit the > > > > hotplug control to pcie ports? At some point I'd like us to > > > > start leaving piix alone.. > > > > > > Yes we really need this feature as want to be able to hot plug devices > > > into the guest but prevent customers from hot unplugging them from say > > > Windows system tray. > > > > > > ani > > > > Problem is, I think this is not something we can support with pcie or shpc. > > I'm reluctant to add features that only ACPI can support, > > we are trying to phase that out. > > >From the upstream POV, there's been no decision / agreement to phase > out PIIX,
Phase out now. But I for one would like to focus on keeping PIIX stable and focus development on q35. Not bloating PIIX with lots of new features is IMHO a good way to do that. > this is purely a RHEL downstream decision & plan. If other > distros / users have a different POV, and find the feature useful, we > should accept the patch if it meets the normal QEMU patch requirements. > > Regards, > Daniel Orthogonality of features is important. It is tough to navigate our feature matrix as it is. Figuring things out if random features depend on other random features becomes impossible. > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
