qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][RESEND][PATCH v1 02/15] virtproxy: qemu-vp, s


From: Amit Shah
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][RESEND][PATCH v1 02/15] virtproxy: qemu-vp, standalone daemon skeleton
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:15:52 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On (Fri) Nov 05 2010 [08:32:30], Adam Litke wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 08:57 -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> > > This resembles vl.c's main_loop_wait() but I can see why you might want
> > > your own.  There is opportunity for sharing the select logic and ioh
> > > callbacks but I think that could be addressed later.
> > >
> > 
> > Yup these are all basically copy/pastes from vl.c. It feels a bit dirty, 
> > but I modeled things after the other qemu tools like qemu-nbd/qemu-io, 
> > which don't link against vl.c (and adding a target for tools to do so 
> > looks like it'd be a bit hairy since vl.c touches basically everything).
> 
> > It might still make sense to share things like structs...but the ones 
> > I'm stealing here are specific to reproducing the main_loop_wait logic. 
> > So I guess the real question is whether main_loop_wait and friends make 
> > sense to expose as a utility function of some sort, and virtproxy seems 
> > to be the only use case so far.
> 
> You make a fair point about following precedent, but the thought of
> dual-maintaining code into the future is not that appealing.  I guess we
> could benefit from other voices on this topic.

I agree we should share the code -- I have some patches for qemu
chardevs to behave reasonably when buffers are full (so we don't see
guest hangs).  You'll benefit as soon as that work enters git.

                Amit



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]