From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Corey Bryant <coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday, July 3rd
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 14:33:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF2E692.7050900@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FF1DB7D.1000006@redhat.com>
Am 02.07.2012 19:33, schrieb Eric Blake:
> On 07/02/2012 04:16 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
>
> Can we discuss the future of 'getfd', the possibility of 'pass-fd', or
> even the enhancement of all existing monitor commands to take an
> optional 'nfds' JSON argument for atomic management of fd passing?
> Which commands need to reopen a file with different access, and do we
> bite the bullet to special case all of those commands to allow fd
> passing or can we make qemu_open() coupled with high-level fd passing
> generic enough to satisfy all of our reopen needs?
Sure we can, at least if Corey will attend the call. Otherwise I guess
it's better to keep the discussion on the mailing list.
Kevin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: Corey Bryant <coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
quintela@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday, July 3rd
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 14:33:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF2E692.7050900@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FF1DB7D.1000006@redhat.com>
Am 02.07.2012 19:33, schrieb Eric Blake:
> On 07/02/2012 04:16 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
>
> Can we discuss the future of 'getfd', the possibility of 'pass-fd', or
> even the enhancement of all existing monitor commands to take an
> optional 'nfds' JSON argument for atomic management of fd passing?
> Which commands need to reopen a file with different access, and do we
> bite the bullet to special case all of those commands to allow fd
> passing or can we make qemu_open() coupled with high-level fd passing
> generic enough to satisfy all of our reopen needs?
Sure we can, at least if Corey will attend the call. Otherwise I guess
it's better to keep the discussion on the mailing list.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-03 12:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-02 10:16 KVM call agenda for Tuesday, July 3rd Juan Quintela
2012-07-02 10:16 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2012-07-02 17:33 ` Eric Blake
2012-07-02 17:33 ` Eric Blake
2012-07-03 12:33 ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2012-07-03 12:33 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-07-03 13:14 ` Corey Bryant
2012-07-03 13:14 ` [Qemu-devel] " Corey Bryant
2012-07-03 3:59 ` 王永博
2012-07-03 3:59 ` [Qemu-devel] " 王永博
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FF2E692.7050900@redhat.com \
--to=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.