From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52529) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lI6-0001AP-O5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:54:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lI3-0000FZ-MA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:54:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58732) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lI3-0000Di-E3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:54:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 18:54:44 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20130726165444.GD18446@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1374584606-5615-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <1374584606-5615-14-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <51F29F77.608@redhat.com> <20130726162655.GC18446@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <51F2A755.1080906@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51F2A755.1080906@redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 13/18] blockdev: Rename I/O throttling options for QMP List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: armbru@redhat.com, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com Am 26.07.2013 um 18:44 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > On 07/26/2013 10:26 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >=20 > >> This patch will probably conflict with Beno=EEt's work on leaky buck= et > >> throttling; can the two of you decide which one should go in first? = Are > >> we trying to target both this series and leaky bucket throttling for= 1.6? > >=20 > > If you complete the review before I leave today, I might still send a > > pull request, but as I'm going to disable blockdev-add and the new > > options once again for 1.6, it doesn't really matter that much. >=20 > In other words, just as it was in 1.5, the new parser is cool enough to > implement the framework now to ease backport efforts, but untested > enough that we'd rather defer use of that framework until after we are > back out of freeze. Right. Before actually committing to the interface, I'd like you to have some real libvirt code running on it. I assume that's doable in the 1.7 time frame, right? > > Beno=EEt's series is for 1.7 as well, if I understood Stefan correctl= y. He >=20 > Even though the latest subject line requests for-1.6? > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-07/msg04005.html Yes, it was discussed on IRC, Beno=EEt will target 1.7 now. > > said he was going to merge a bug fix part of it for 1.6 and leave the > > rest for 1.7. (I haven't been following the throttling series myself, > > that's why I can't comment in much more detail.) >=20 > I guess I also need to comment on that series - we're late enough that > bug fixes are okay, but new options are risky; and the tail end of that > series adds new options to throttling as part of switching to a new > algorithm. Indeed, adding new options and switching the whole algorithm that late in the cycle is something that I would find a little bit too scary. Kevin