On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 15:56, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > > (3) what should we do about the HMP StatusInfo object? > > I'm not sure how we handle compatibility for HMP. > > Uh, you mean *QMP*, don't you?
Yes. > As you wrote above, StatusInfo is returned by query-status, which is a > stable interface. Changes to members therefore require the usual > deprecation grace period. We'd add a new member with a sane name, and > deprecate the old one. Question: is it worth creating a new 'one-insn-per-tb' member at all, or should we instead just make the 'singlestep' member optional and then stop emitting it (and as a corollary stop reporting it in HMP 'info status')? It seems kind of weird that we surface this specific slightly esoteric accelerator property and only this one in the StatusInfo struct. -- PMM
