On Mon, 28 May 2012 16:36:16 +0300 Alon Levy <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:13:28AM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > On Mon, 28 May 2012 12:08:13 +0300 > > Alon Levy <al...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:43:11AM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > > > On Thu, 24 May 2012 19:22:52 +0300 > > > > Alon Levy <al...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > For all devices print id, mode and guest_bug status. > > > > > > > > Is qxl really tied to spice? In the meaning that it's impossible to use > > > > it > > > > without spice? Wouldn't it be better to have 'info display' instead? > > > > > > Would a patch implementing 'info display' require me to implement it for > > > all displays? > > > > Would be nice, even if we start with very basic information. > > How would that work? I have QXLInfo that only makes sense when the > information is about a qxl device. Can't have opaque data in a QMP > response, so would this be a "info display qxl" "info display cirrus" > etc. or "info qxl"? You could show what's available and/or being used currently. To be honest, I'm not very familiar with any of those drivers and don't know if/how management would use that information. I suggested 'info display' because it seemed more natural to me (vs. having this info tied to 'info spice').
