From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54376) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHytZ-0000iu-0u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:28:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHytQ-0006hD-JJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:28:28 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8807) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHytQ-0006gz-CZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:28:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 18:28:10 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20130906162810.GO2588@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1378477839-7353-1-git-send-email-gabriel@kerneis.info> <5229F68F.8060704@ctshepherd.com> <20130906160519.GA7913@kerneis.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130906160519.GA7913@kerneis.info> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Introducing CoroCheck and proposal for a blocking_fn annotation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gabriel Kerneis Cc: Charlie Shepherd , pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@gmail.com Am 06.09.2013 um 18:05 hat Gabriel Kerneis geschrieben: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 04:36:47PM +0100, Charlie Shepherd wrote: > > However, I'm not sure it makes sense to use blocking_fn until the > > convert-block series (which currently needs a respin after Stefan's > > review) is fully upstreamed. Maybe this patch makes most sense at > > the start of that series? > > Yes, definitely, that's why I labeled it RFC rather than PATCH. But if > people agree, it would make much more sense to have the annotations > within your patch series rather than added later (notwithstanding the > fact that it would ease your refactoring effort). Makes sense to me, go ahead and put it to use. Kevin