On 20/03/2017 18:01, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 20 March 2017 at 16:29, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >>>> I have some comments which feel kind of nit-picky, but since this >>>> is a public-facing HMP API I think they need attention since we only >>>> get one chance to get it right. >>> >>> HMP is not a stable interface. If we get it wrong, we change it. If >>> our change breaks your usage, you get to keep the pieces. >> >> Oh yes, I had my HMP and QMP the wrong way round. >> >> ...which reminds me that I thought we preferred all HMP commands >> to be implemented in terms of their QMP equivalent ? > > Yes. We make exceptions for commands we believe have no QMP use, such > as "print". I figure the rationale for these is "just for testing". > Paolo, can you confirm?
Yes. If somebody comes up with a non-testing use, I suppose we can always add a QMP variant. I'll send v3 which uses the current monitor CPU's address space according to Peter's review. Paolo
