From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:41:44 -0800 Message-ID: <1683801.VNKd61ZM1Q@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> References: <20130108235633.3719.6085.stgit@promb-2n-dhcp175.eng.vmware.com> <20130109002110.GB5296@kroah.com> <20130108.173056.1029788106028104571.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130108.173056.1029788106028104571.davem@davemloft.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: pv-drivers@vmware.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 05:30:56 PM David Miller wrote: > From: Greg KH > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:21:10 -0800 > > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 03:59:08PM -0800, George Zhang wrote: > >> * * * > >> > >> This series of VSOCK linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from > >> VMware to address Greg's and all other's code review comments. > > > > Dave, you acked these patches a while ago, > > Really? I'd like to see where I did that. > > Instead, what I remember doing was deferring to the feedback these > folks received, stating that ideas that the virtio people had > mentioned should be considered instead. > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135301515818462&w=2 I believe Andy replied to Anthony's AF_VMCHANNEL post and the differences between the proposed solutions. > > So definitely NACK this code and any infrastructure you've > merged which essentialy depends upon it. No, there is no infrastructure that depends on VSOCK, as VSOCK is built on top of VMCI, not the other way around. Thanks, Dmitry From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756303Ab3AIBlq (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 20:41:46 -0500 Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com ([208.91.2.13]:46461 "EHLO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756096Ab3AIBlp (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 20:41:45 -0500 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: pv-drivers@vmware.com Cc: David Miller , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:41:44 -0800 Message-ID: <1683801.VNKd61ZM1Q@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> Organization: VMware, Inc. User-Agent: KMail/4.9.4 (Linux/3.7.0+; KDE/4.9.4; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20130108.173056.1029788106028104571.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20130108235633.3719.6085.stgit@promb-2n-dhcp175.eng.vmware.com> <20130109002110.GB5296@kroah.com> <20130108.173056.1029788106028104571.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 05:30:56 PM David Miller wrote: > From: Greg KH > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:21:10 -0800 > > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 03:59:08PM -0800, George Zhang wrote: > >> * * * > >> > >> This series of VSOCK linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from > >> VMware to address Greg's and all other's code review comments. > > > > Dave, you acked these patches a while ago, > > Really? I'd like to see where I did that. > > Instead, what I remember doing was deferring to the feedback these > folks received, stating that ideas that the virtio people had > mentioned should be considered instead. > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135301515818462&w=2 I believe Andy replied to Anthony's AF_VMCHANNEL post and the differences between the proposed solutions. > > So definitely NACK this code and any infrastructure you've > merged which essentialy depends upon it. No, there is no infrastructure that depends on VSOCK, as VSOCK is built on top of VMCI, not the other way around. Thanks, Dmitry