From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34835)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VUI0G-0003Bk-C0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:18:22 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VUI08-0004EC-D2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:18:16 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3940)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1VUI08-0004E0-4c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:18:08 -0400
Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9AFI6oD005592
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:18:07 -0400
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:17:52 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20131010151751.GA809@amt.cnet>
References: <20131008004126.773017235@amt.cnet>
	<874n8sp68n.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <5253BC12.90105@redhat.com>
	<20131008220329.GB16625@amt.cnet>
	<87r4bv7yjl.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20131009200517.GB16670@amt.cnet> <5255CA49.4060309@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5255CA49.4060309@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 0/2] force -mem-path RAM allocation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 11:27:37PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/10/2013 22:05, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
> >>> > > Can the new option format for memory be created incrementally on 
> >>> > > top of -mem-path-force? (agree its a good thing, it avoids proliferation
> >>> > > of new options).
> >> > 
> >> > If you do it on top, it won't avoid proliferation, or am I missing
> >> > something?
> > Right. But in fact, the new option is not necessary. 
> > 
> > So please consider only patch 2 for inclusion.
> 
> Do you mean only patch 1?
> 
> Paolo

Yes.