On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:01:18PM +0530, Kirti Wankhede wrote: > > > On 9/20/2016 8:44 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:05:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 20/09/2016 16:58, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >>>>> As I've said in my earlier reply - libvirt will *NOT* support passing > >>>>> arbitrary vendor specific parameters as a blob via the XML. Everything > >>>>> that appears in the XML must be *fully* specified and explicitly > >>>>> represented in the XML as a distinct attribute or element. > >>>> > >>>> Are generic key/value attributes (e.g. a <attribute> element) acceptable? > >>> > >>> Only if libvirt has a known list of valid attribute key names upfront. > >>> We don't want to just blindly expose arbitary vendor specific keys exposed > >>> by the kernel. Libvirt's job is to ensure the XML representation is vendor > >>> portable > >> > > In key/value attributes (taking example from proposed xml file) > > <attribute name='resolution'>2560x1600</attribute> > > 'Key' (i.e. 'resolution') should be known upfront, not the value, right?
NB, resolution is a good example of why we would *not* use the generic <attribute name='$key'>$value</attribute> format in the XML. Instead we'd represent it as <resolution width='2560' height='1600'/> as applications should not have to further parse data after extracting it from an XML attribute/element. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|