From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] virtio support for container
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:26:47 +0900
Message-ID: <56949CA7.50003@igel.co.jp>
References: <1446748276-132087-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <1452426182-86851-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <569490D9.10803@igel.co.jp> <5694934B.5070900@intel.com>
 <5694969D.3040008@igel.co.jp> <20160112061434.GL26062@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: nakajima.yoshihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp, mst@redhat.com, dev@dpdk.org,
 ann.zhuangyanying@huawei.com
To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
 "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>, "Xu, Qian Q" <qian.q.xu@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com (mail-pa0-f51.google.com
 [209.85.220.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10AF52EDA
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:26:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id yy13so241742851pab.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:26:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20160112061434.GL26062@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 2016/01/12 15:14, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 03:01:01PM +0900, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote:
>> On 2016/01/12 14:46, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
>>> Hi Tetsuya,
>>>  
>>>
>>>> Hi Jianfeng and Xie,
>>>>
>>>> I guess my implementation and yours have a lot of common code, so I will
>>>> try to rebase my patch on yours.
>>> We also think so. And before you rebase your code, I think we can rely
>>> on Yuanhan's
>>> struct virtio_pci_ops to make the code structure brief and clear, as
>>> discussed in your
>>> patch's thread, i.e., we both rebase our code according to Yuanhan's
>>> code. Is that OK?
>>>
>> Yes, I agree with it.
> I will send v2 out today, and hopefully someone will ACK and test it
> soon.  After that, I'm also hoping Thomas could do a quick merge then.
>
> 	--yliu
>

Hi Yuanhan,

Thanks, I will review and test it also.

Tetsuya