From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49792)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1XdwQj-0006G2-U8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 03:22:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1XdwQd-0000VS-QY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 03:22:01 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22991)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1XdwQd-0000VF-JL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 03:21:55 -0400
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1412941145-14023-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> (David
	Alan Gilbert's message of "Fri, 10 Oct 2014 12:39:03 +0100")
References: <1412941145-14023-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:21:36 +0200
Message-ID: <874mv7glq7.fsf@elfo.elfo>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 0/2] In memory QEMUFile
Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Cc: joel.schopp@amd.com, zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, arei.gonglei@huawei.com, sanidhya.iiith@gmail.com

"Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" <dgilbert@redhat.com> wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
>
>   This patch-pair adds the QEMUSizedBuffer based in-memory QEMUFile
> written by Stefan Berger and Joel Schopp.  I've made some
> fixes and modified the existing test-vmstate to use it for some test cases.
>
>   While there's nothing other than test cases using it yet, I think
> it's worth going in by itself, since I'm using it in two separate
> patchsets (postcopy and visitor/BER) and Sanidhya uses it in
> the periodic vmstate test world.  In addition both microcheckpointing and
> COLO have similar but independent implementations (although they both
> have some extra-gotcha's so it might not be possible to reuse it), and
> there was another implementation of the same thing in the Yabusame Postcopy
> world.  Thus it seems best to put in, if only to stop people writing yet
> another implementation.
>
> (Eric I've kept your reviewed-by from v5 - please confirm you're OK)
>
> Dave

Applied, thanks.