On 21 May 2012 18:30, Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Yeah, you could turn all FLOPPY_DPRINTFs into trace events. But the >> point here is that today it's a FLOPPY_ERROR, and except for register >> fuzzing they report real problems with the emulation and not just some >> debugging information. So I'm not sure if hiding them is really a fix. > > While not a DoS, letting the guest spam the console at will is not > nice either. Maybe we need a new method to enable a selected set of > printouts, something like '-d unimplemented'. That way no recompiling > would be needed.
+1 for a better set of graduated logging/debug levels and a sensible command line interface for turning them on and off. Possible severity levels: * debug output * guest has done something that suggests it might be buggy, eg accessing nonexistent register * guest has tried to use something qemu doesn't implement * qemu (fatal) error These should be orthogonal to the "what area should we print logging for" question, I think. With a clean API for defining log messages I think we could clean up a lot of the legacy functions for asserting/aborting in various ways (in particular a lot of the hw_error() uses). -- PMM
