From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mgz9X-0000Q3-TR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:57:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mgz9S-0000J9-QR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:57:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58203 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mgz9S-0000Ic-E2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:57:50 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:44717) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mgz9S-0000Ry-2T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:57:50 -0400 Received: from cerberus.snarc.org ([212.85.155.21]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mgz9N-0003b7-OI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:57:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:43:35 +0100 From: Vincent Hanquez Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 00/29] QMonitor Message-ID: <20090828114334.GA3107@snarc.org> References: <1251306352-31316-1-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1251306352-31316-1-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Luiz Capitulino Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, avi@redhat.com On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 02:05:23PM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > Hi there, > > This new version of the QMonitor series has more simplifications, > renames and improvements. > > Most changes are because of simplifications on QInt, please review > carefully its implementation and usage. > > Changelog, description and diffstat follows. Hi Luiz, This is a quite nice serie of patches ! just a single question with the direction of this refactoring... Are you going to also wrap the monitor functions return values into the Q* types as well ? that would make the monitor transport (whatever it is) completely separated from the monitor functions and quite nice from a modularity PoV. Cheers, -- Vincent