| Message ID | 1450179992-15959-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 15/12/2015 12:46, Thomas Huth wrote: > We likely don't want to maintain the legacy -net options forever, > so let's start informing the users that this option will be > removed in a future version. However, there are two cases where > we should not spill out a message yet: First is the "-net nic" > option which might still be required to configure on-board NICs > that can not be handled via "-netdev" yet, and second is the > "-net user" default option that is created automatically when > no other networking option has been specified. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > net/net.c | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/net/net.c b/net/net.c > index ade6051..2593961 100644 > --- a/net/net.c > +++ b/net/net.c > @@ -1006,6 +1006,12 @@ static int net_client_init1(const void *object, int is_netdev, Error **errp) > return -1; > } > > + if (opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_NIC && > + (!default_net || opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_USER)) { > + error_report("Deprecated net option - " > + "this will be removed in a future version!"); > + } Honestly, I still do not believe that they will be removed. They are little more than syntactic sugar at this point. Paolo > if (!net_client_init_fun[opts->type]) { > error_setg(errp, QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE, "type", > "a net backend type (maybe it is not compiled " >
On 15/12/15 13:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 15/12/2015 12:46, Thomas Huth wrote: >> We likely don't want to maintain the legacy -net options forever, >> so let's start informing the users that this option will be >> removed in a future version. However, there are two cases where >> we should not spill out a message yet: First is the "-net nic" >> option which might still be required to configure on-board NICs >> that can not be handled via "-netdev" yet, and second is the >> "-net user" default option that is created automatically when >> no other networking option has been specified. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >> --- >> net/net.c | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/net/net.c b/net/net.c >> index ade6051..2593961 100644 >> --- a/net/net.c >> +++ b/net/net.c >> @@ -1006,6 +1006,12 @@ static int net_client_init1(const void *object, int is_netdev, Error **errp) >> return -1; >> } >> >> + if (opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_NIC && >> + (!default_net || opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_USER)) { >> + error_report("Deprecated net option - " >> + "this will be removed in a future version!"); >> + } > > Honestly, I still do not believe that they will be removed. They are > little more than syntactic sugar at this point. As far as I can tell, that "-net" vs. "-netdev" dualism causes quite often confusion for the users. Some options work with "-net", some only work with "-netdev", and the ones that work with both often also behave slightly differently (see [1] for example). I've already had to deal with a bug ticket in this area, and it's just cumbersome to always find out and explain the differences. One other example is the "-net nic,model=?" help text. It is inaccurate for a couple of machines - and if somebody tries to fix problems like this, you're often told something like "oh, it's the legacy -net option, simply forget about that" [2]. And if you additionally ever had to deal with all that vlan code and duplicated option parsing stuff in the net/ code, then you certainly do not think anymore that this is just a little bit more than "syntactic sugar". I'm fine if we keep the "-net" options for a couple of more versions of QEMU, but we should be prepared to be able to remove it quickly once it is getting into the way again too much. So we better start nagging the users about "-net" being deprecated now, than discovering later that we have to deal with this legacy stuff for longer than we would like to. Thomas [1] http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-virtualization-and-cloud-90/cannot-set-mac-address-with-qemu-4175490716/ [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2013-10/msg00088.html
On 15 December 2015 at 12:51, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > Honestly, I still do not believe that they will be removed. They are > little more than syntactic sugar at this point. If they're just syntactic sugar, what is the new-style command line mechanism for configuring boards with embedded network controller devices? Last time I looked at this that was just impossible...and as long as it is, you can't get rid of any of the backend -net config either, because it has to be either all -net or all new-style and not a mix (I think). thanks -- PMM
On 15/12/2015 17:01, Thomas Huth wrote: > Some options work with "-net", some only work with "-netdev", > and the ones that work with both often also behave slightly differently (see > [1] for example). This example is about -net nic, which you're keeping. What are the options that differ between them for network backends? > One other example is the "-net nic,model=?" help text. It is inaccurate for a > couple of machines - and if somebody tries to fix problems like this, you're > often told something like "oh, it's the legacy -net option, simply forget about > that" [2]. Nobody mentioned legacy in that thread... Alex just said *he* would not bother, but if you could come up with a better way to do it, it would surely be accepted. For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that support device_add. > And if you additionally ever had to deal with all that vlan code and duplicated > option parsing stuff in the net/ code, then you certainly do not think anymore > that this is just a little bit more than "syntactic sugar". In fact there isn't much shared code in the is_netdev=0 and is_netdev=1 cases. Perhaps you could just make a shared function with just if (net_client_init_fun[opts->type](opts, name, peer, errp) < 0) { /* FIXME drop when all init functions store an Error */ if (errp && !*errp) { error_setg(errp, QERR_DEVICE_INIT_FAILED, NetClientOptionsKind_lookup[opts->type]); } return -1; } and inline all the rest of net_client_init1, net_visit, net_client_init into two functions netdev_add and net_legacy_add. Then -net handling (including HMP) can be moved into a separate file which no one looks at. > I'm fine if we keep the "-net" options for a couple of more versions of QEMU, > but we should be prepared to be able to remove it quickly once it is getting into > the way again too much. So we better start nagging the users about "-net" being > deprecated now, than discovering later that we have to deal with this legacy > stuff for longer than we would like to. The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want is something I can ssh into. It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) Paolo
On 15/12/15 17:17, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 15 December 2015 at 12:51, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >> Honestly, I still do not believe that they will be removed. They are >> little more than syntactic sugar at this point. > > If they're just syntactic sugar, what is the new-style command > line mechanism for configuring boards with embedded network > controller devices? Last time I looked at this that was just > impossible...and as long as it is, you can't get rid of any > of the backend -net config either, because it has to be either > all -net or all new-style and not a mix (I think). No, you can use "-netdev user,id=mynet -net nic,netdev=mynet" for example to wire an embedded network controller to a netdev device, so that's not a problem anymore. Thomas
On 15 December 2015 at 16:33, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: > On 15/12/15 17:17, Peter Maydell wrote: >> If they're just syntactic sugar, what is the new-style command >> line mechanism for configuring boards with embedded network >> controller devices? Last time I looked at this that was just >> impossible...and as long as it is, you can't get rid of any >> of the backend -net config either, because it has to be either >> all -net or all new-style and not a mix (I think). > > No, you can use "-netdev user,id=mynet -net nic,netdev=mynet" for > example to wire an embedded network controller to a netdev device, so > that's not a problem anymore. Oh good. We should probably document this on http://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/Networking somewhere. thanks -- PMM
On 12/15/2015 09:21 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > In fact there isn't much shared code in the is_netdev=0 and is_netdev=1 > cases. Perhaps you could just make a shared function with just > > if (net_client_init_fun[opts->type](opts, name, peer, errp) < 0) { > /* FIXME drop when all init functions store an Error */ > if (errp && !*errp) { > error_setg(errp, QERR_DEVICE_INIT_FAILED, > NetClientOptionsKind_lookup[opts->type]); > } > return -1; > } > > > and inline all the rest of net_client_init1, net_visit, net_client_init > into two functions netdev_add and net_legacy_add. Then -net handling > (including HMP) can be moved into a separate file which no one looks at. There's also some pending patches from qapi refactoring and from Zoltan's work towards audio unification (which spilled over into netdev refactoring), which may impact things here. For my latest version, see: http://repo.or.cz/qemu/ericb.git/shortlog/refs/heads/qapi
On 15/12/15 17:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 15/12/2015 17:01, Thomas Huth wrote: >> Some options work with "-net", some only work with "-netdev", >> and the ones that work with both often also behave slightly differently (see >> [1] for example). > > This example is about -net nic, which you're keeping. What are the > options that differ between them for network backends? The vlan option only exists for the "-net" backends. And I somehow thought that all the vhost related stuff would only work with the "-netdev", but I can not spot that in the code anymore, so I guess I simply got that wrong. >> One other example is the "-net nic,model=?" help text. It is inaccurate for a >> couple of machines - and if somebody tries to fix problems like this, you're >> often told something like "oh, it's the legacy -net option, simply forget about >> that" [2]. > > Nobody mentioned legacy in that thread... Alex just said *he* would not > bother, but if you could come up with a better way to do it, it would > surely be accepted. Ok, maybe should have cited this one here instead: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2013-11/msg00040.html Markus said: "My advice would be to let -net nic rot in peace." > For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that > support device_add. I think that would not work since spapr-vlan is not hot-pluggable. >> And if you additionally ever had to deal with all that vlan code and duplicated >> option parsing stuff in the net/ code, then you certainly do not think anymore >> that this is just a little bit more than "syntactic sugar". > > In fact there isn't much shared code in the is_netdev=0 and is_netdev=1 > cases. Perhaps you could just make a shared function with just > > if (net_client_init_fun[opts->type](opts, name, peer, errp) < 0) { > /* FIXME drop when all init functions store an Error */ > if (errp && !*errp) { > error_setg(errp, QERR_DEVICE_INIT_FAILED, > NetClientOptionsKind_lookup[opts->type]); > } > return -1; > } > > > and inline all the rest of net_client_init1, net_visit, net_client_init > into two functions netdev_add and net_legacy_add. Then -net handling > (including HMP) can be moved into a separate file which no one looks at. Well, moving the code into a file "which no one looks at" does not really solve the problem. When you want to modify the net code, you can not simply ignore this since it is still there and needs to be kept alive when it breaks or does not compile anymore. >> I'm fine if we keep the "-net" options for a couple of more versions of QEMU, >> but we should be prepared to be able to remove it quickly once it is getting into >> the way again too much. So we better start nagging the users about "-net" being >> deprecated now, than discovering later that we have to deal with this legacy >> stuff for longer than we would like to. > > The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. > > "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than > "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want > is something I can ssh into. > > It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's > worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) Ok, if you want to maintain that legacy stuff forever - fine. I thought it would be a good idea to slowly get rid off it, but honestly, if there's so much resistance ... I've also got other stuff to do, so simply forget about this. Thomas
On 15/12/2015 18:15, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 15/12/15 17:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 15/12/2015 17:01, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> Some options work with "-net", some only work with "-netdev", >>> and the ones that work with both often also behave slightly differently (see >>> [1] for example). >> >> This example is about -net nic, which you're keeping. What are the >> options that differ between them for network backends? > > The vlan option only exists for the "-net" backends. Yup, vlans (implicit hubs) are the main difference between -net and -netdev. That's pretty much the only one, and it's not specific to single backends. > And I somehow > thought that all the vhost related stuff would only work with the > "-netdev", but I can not spot that in the code anymore, so I guess I > simply got that wrong. vhost probably doesn't start unless you use -netdev. It's just ignored. But I may also be remembering wrong. > Ok, maybe should have cited this one here instead: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2013-11/msg00040.html > > Markus said: "My advice would be to let -net nic rot in peace." That would have meant not supporting "-net nic,model=ibmveth" to begin with. Too late, so a good solution would always be accepted. We deal with "legacy" stuff all the time, and sometime even improve it. To some extent HMP is considered legacy for example, but no one in their right minds would eliminate it. >> For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that >> support device_add. > > I think that would not work since spapr-vlan is not hot-pluggable. cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet which actually refers to -device, not really device_add, so it would work. The only issue would be that the default name is spapr-vlan rather than ibmveth. That would be not too bad as a backwards-incompatible change. >> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >> >> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >> is something I can ssh into. >> >> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) > > Ok, if you want to maintain that legacy stuff forever - fine. I don't want to, but I think we have to. It would be a good idea to get rid of it, but unfortunately it's not a feasible idea IMHO. > I thought it would be a good idea to slowly get rid off it, but honestly, if > there's so much resistance ... I've also got other stuff to do, so > simply forget about this. I'm sorry. It's just that _I_ would be a bit pissed off by it, even though I type 500-characters QEMU command lines daily, therefore I think end users would complain even more. I would live with it, but for regular users I don't think we would do them a great service. It's the same as all the other shortcut options (-hda, -drive with if!=none, -vga). Many of them enjoy similar amounts of cruft, but they cannot really go away. :( Paolo
On 15/12/15 18:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 15/12/2015 18:15, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 15/12/15 17:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: [...] >>> For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that >>> support device_add. >> >> I think that would not work since spapr-vlan is not hot-pluggable. > > cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet which actually refers to -device, > not really device_add, so it would work. I just tried: (qemu) device_add spapr-vlan Bus 'spapr-vio' does not support hotplugging ... did I miss something? >>> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >>> >>> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >>> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >>> is something I can ssh into. >>> >>> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >>> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) >> >> Ok, if you want to maintain that legacy stuff forever - fine. > > I don't want to, but I think we have to. It would be a good idea to get > rid of it, but unfortunately it's not a feasible idea IMHO. If the code gets unmaintainable because there is too much legacy cruft in it, that's IMHO even worse. At one point in time, you just have to get rid of such stuff ... but well, maybe the time for the "-net" option just has not come yet. Thomas
On 15/12/2015 18:50, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 15/12/15 18:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> On 15/12/2015 18:15, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> On 15/12/15 17:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > [...] >>>> For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that >>>> support device_add. >>> >>> I think that would not work since spapr-vlan is not hot-pluggable. >> >> cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet which actually refers to -device, >> not really device_add, so it would work. > > I just tried: > > (qemu) device_add spapr-vlan > Bus 'spapr-vio' does not support hotplugging > > ... did I miss something? When I said "support device_add" I really meant "does not have cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet", but spapr-vlan should pass that test. >>>> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >>>> >>>> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >>>> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >>>> is something I can ssh into. >>>> >>>> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >>>> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) >>> >>> Ok, if you want to maintain that legacy stuff forever - fine. >> >> I don't want to, but I think we have to. It would be a good idea to get >> rid of it, but unfortunately it's not a feasible idea IMHO. > > If the code gets unmaintainable because there is too much legacy cruft > in it, that's IMHO even worse. At one point in time, you just have to > get rid of such stuff ... but well, maybe the time for the "-net" option > just has not come yet. Yes, indeed. I don't think it's unmaintainable. It used to be much worse, and it could be improved. Paolo
On 15/12/15 19:08, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 15/12/2015 18:50, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 15/12/15 18:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>> On 15/12/2015 18:15, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> On 15/12/15 17:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> [...] >>>>> For example you could print all DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK devices that >>>>> support device_add. >>>> >>>> I think that would not work since spapr-vlan is not hot-pluggable. >>> >>> cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet which actually refers to -device, >>> not really device_add, so it would work. >> >> I just tried: >> >> (qemu) device_add spapr-vlan >> Bus 'spapr-vio' does not support hotplugging >> >> ... did I miss something? > > When I said "support device_add" I really meant "does not have > cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet", but spapr-vlan should pass that > test. Ah, ok, that makes more sense... anyway, "-device ?" also lists some devices like "ne2k_isa", ""usb-bt-dongle" and "vmxnet3" ... I somewhat doubt that we want to have these in the list of "-net nic" supported devices, too. ... hmmm, by the way, why the heck do we have vmxnet3 on powerpc? Does that make sense at all? >>>>> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >>>>> >>>>> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >>>>> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >>>>> is something I can ssh into. >>>>> >>>>> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >>>>> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) Just another idea before we drop this topic again completely: What if we'd extend "-netdev" to be easier to use, too. For example, if you'd just specify "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0", without using an id and without specifying a "-device", you would get the netdev hooked up to the board's default NIC automatically. That would be even less to type than your example with "-net" since you would not need the "-net nic" parameter in that case... Would it then be ok to deprecate the "-net" option? Thomas
On 16/12/2015 08:20, Thomas Huth wrote: > Ah, ok, that makes more sense... anyway, "-device ?" also lists some > devices like "ne2k_isa", ""usb-bt-dongle" and "vmxnet3" ... I somewhat > doubt that we want to have these in the list of "-net nic" supported > devices, too. Why not? > ... hmmm, by the way, why the heck do we have vmxnet3 on powerpc? Does > that make sense at all? By default all PCI devices are included in all targets, that's the simple explanation. :) >>>>>> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >>>>>> >>>>>> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >>>>>> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >>>>>> is something I can ssh into. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >>>>>> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) > > Just another idea before we drop this topic again completely: What if > we'd extend "-netdev" to be easier to use, too. For example, if you'd > just specify "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0", without using an id and without > specifying a "-device", you would get the netdev hooked up to the > board's default NIC automatically. That would be even less to type than > your example with "-net" since you would not need the "-net nic" > parameter in that case... Would it then be ok to deprecate the "-net" > option? Actually that would be the worst of both worlds. :) The point of -netdev is exactly to have no magic, to be a direct connection between the command line and the devices. It makes sense, it's just not too user friendly. I really think that if you move -net to net/netlegacy.c it wouldn't look bad at all. Paolo
diff --git a/net/net.c b/net/net.c index ade6051..2593961 100644 --- a/net/net.c +++ b/net/net.c @@ -1006,6 +1006,12 @@ static int net_client_init1(const void *object, int is_netdev, Error **errp) return -1; } + if (opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_NIC && + (!default_net || opts->type != NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_USER)) { + error_report("Deprecated net option - " + "this will be removed in a future version!"); + } + if (!net_client_init_fun[opts->type]) { error_setg(errp, QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE, "type", "a net backend type (maybe it is not compiled "
We likely don't want to maintain the legacy -net options forever, so let's start informing the users that this option will be removed in a future version. However, there are two cases where we should not spill out a message yet: First is the "-net nic" option which might still be required to configure on-board NICs that can not be handled via "-netdev" yet, and second is the "-net user" default option that is created automatically when no other networking option has been specified. Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> --- net/net.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)