[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Future of icount discussion for next KVM call?
From: |
Markus Armbruster |
Subject: |
Re: Future of icount discussion for next KVM call? |
Date: |
Thu, 16 Feb 2023 13:20:00 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) |
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:
> Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>> (replying all because qemu-devel rejected my email again)
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 at 10:19, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Juan,
>>>
>>> Do we have an agenda for next weeks KVM call yet? If there is space I'd
>>> like to take some time to discuss the future direction of icount.
>
> For next week we have:
> - more single binary qemu (philippe?)
> - TDX migration from intel.
> We asked them on the previous call to change their design to transfer
> stuff through migration channels and not create a new channel. But I
> haven't heard from intel. (wei?)
> They agreed to send the slides and post the code before continue
> discussion.
>
> And now I like the title of you topic
>
> - Future Direction of icount
>
> O:-)
>
> So, I will recommend 20 minutes each if Wei shows up, or 30/30 for the
> rest.
>
> What do the rest of the people think.
I think we either need fewer topics per call (ideally one), or strictly
enforced time limits per topic. I don't fancy meetings where the topic
that made me attend falls off the end.
The former may necessitate more frequent calls.