Cc'ing avocado-devel for test ideas. On 8/28/19 6:57 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 11:35:24 -0300 > Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:52:28AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: ... >>> In addition, I'd like us to either work on making the rule stick in the >>> future (see my reply to Igor for an idea), or ditch the rule. But >>> that's outside the scope of this regression fix. >> >> I'd prefer to ditch the rule, or at least change it to be a >> suggestion instead of a requirement. > Perhaps someone reads docs and uses API as designed (libvirt is not the only > user) > > I'd prefer to allow implicit die-id in 4.1 and 'stable' as that > ship has already sailed and make it mandatory since 4.2 as it is > supposed to be (+opening bug on libvirt - hoping that API would > be fixed properly this time). > > > Another related to die-id series bug: > We should hide die-id from query-hotpluggable-cpus output > for 4.0 and older machine types as well, so it won't break > migration for users that implement interface as documented > as it won't be possible to start > old-qemu-4.0 -device cpufoo,die-id=0,... > since that "-device cpufoo,die-id=0,..." were used on new-qemu source. > > PS: > Adding affected targets maintainers to the loop to see if > we can drop restriction. > > Even though it works fine for die-id and I don't see immediate problems > with relaxing rule, I reluctant to do it, since instead of simple > "add all properties you were told to" > implicit rules would evolve into mess similar to smp_parse() over time. > > Also if we would need to change implicit values logic down the road > it would be a pain like with any default parameters in QEMU, which is > a good reason against relaxing rule. > >