From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1sDJ-0002Cu-RZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 07:33:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1sDJ-0007E7-5Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 07:33:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54120) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1sDI-0007DL-VI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 07:33:29 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C03F30D78BC for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 12:25:11 +0000 (UTC) From: Juan Quintela In-Reply-To: <20190306152812.GF2727@work-vm> (David Alan Gilbert's message of "Wed, 6 Mar 2019 15:28:13 +0000") References: <20190227110812.2185-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20190227110812.2185-4-quintela@redhat.com> <20190306152812.GF2727@work-vm> Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 13:28:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87o96m3m2o.fsf@trasno.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 3/8] multifd: Create new next_packet_size field List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Eric Blake , Thomas Huth , Paolo Bonzini , Laurent Vivier "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >> We need to send this field when we add compression support. As we are >> still on x- stage, we can do this kind of changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela > > OK, so that kind of makes sense - in that what you want to do is read > the whole compressed chunk in one go. > > Consider it might be a good idea to add some spare entries here; > say a uint64_t dummy[4] so that if you need any more fields in the > future it'll be easy to add them without breaking compatibility. We have a version field, so ... we can handle it relatively gratiously, but I see your point. How many? Later, Juan.