From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 24 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:53:28 +0100 Message-ID: <4F1EC5E8.9050600@redhat.com> References: <4F1EB8AF.3080804@codemonkey.ws> <4F1EBA35.20902@redhat.com> <4F1EBB7A.8090903@codemonkey.ws> <4F1EC099.9080705@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Markus Armbruster To: Kevin Wolf Return-path: Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:43171 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756872Ab2AXOxg (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:53:36 -0500 Received: by ghrr11 with SMTP id r11so816956ghr.19 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 06:53:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F1EC099.9080705@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/24/2012 03:30 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> >> * qtest/libos: Python or C? >> > >> > Both. > More importantly: When?:-) > > Are there still any problems that must be fixed before it can be merged? There was no discussion on my alternative proposal on IRQ interception. Which might mean it's all fine and it will just replace Anthony's qtest_interrupt_controller, but I'm not that optimist. :) Certainly Anthony's approach to IRQ interception had some objections from Peter (which I second). Also, Anthony's sleep(1) hack _can_ be eliminated, I didn't have it in my Python version. In that series I also had vm_clock management, but it can go in afterwards. Similarly, PyUnit integration can be committed separately. Knowing that the answer is "both" is fine. URLs: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/132558 (IRQ/timer) http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/132512 (Python) Paolo