From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] librte_vhost: Add unix domain socket fd
	registration
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:19:45 -0400
Message-ID: <f7ttwge8mni.fsf@redhat.com>
References: <1466177556-14891-1-git-send-email-aconole@redhat.com>
 <20160621072128.GK23111@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <87r3bqn0o8.fsf@trashheap.bytheb.org>
 <20160624023105.GS23111@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <74F120C019F4A64C9B78E802F6AD4CC24F8E0AA7@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20160624075103.GT23111@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <87lh1uai7b.fsf@trashheap.bytheb.org>
 <20160627115356.GX23111@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: "Loftus\, Ciara" <ciara.loftus@intel.com>, "dev\@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "Xie\, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>,
 Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B015582
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:19:49 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20160627115356.GX23111@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (Yuanhan Liu's
 message of "Mon, 27 Jun 2016 19:53:56 +0800")
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>

Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 08:23:52AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> Is there still merit to this patch, given above?  If so, I'd finish my
>> integration and testing work and submit it formally.
>
> Sorry, I don't see the strong need of this patch (at least so far),
> judging that vhost-user as the client could solve the issue your
> patch meant to resolve.

Okay, thanks so much for the review and consideration, Yuanhan!

-Aaron