From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48756) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gPWcP-00033n-DD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:48:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gPWTe-0007MJ-75 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:39:54 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52554) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gPWTe-0007Lf-1p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:39:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:39:47 -0500 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20181121123929-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1542799319-2595-1-git-send-email-liq3ea@gmail.com> <20181121115718.GN26577@redhat.com> <20181121072237-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <60500f8b-47e8-c530-076a-d7f14d0f0ee5@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <60500f8b-47e8-c530-076a-d7f14d0f0ee5@redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] net: tap: use qemu_set_nonblock List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=2E_Berrang=E9?= , Li Qiang , Jason Wang , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marc-Andr=E9?= Lureau , QEMU On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:30:41AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/21/18 6:23 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >=20 > > >=20 > > > I agree it is good to preserve fcntl flags though, so this patch > > > looks desirable. > > >=20 > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrang=E9 > >=20 > > Sure > >=20 > > Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > >=20 > > but really not for this release I guess as we are in freeze. >=20 > We're in freeze, so the criteria is: Does this fix a bug that we would > otherwise not want in 3.1. If the code is pre-existing (that is, if 3.= 0 was > released with the same problem), or then delaying the patch to 4.0 is a= n > easier call to make. If the problem is new to 3.1, then fixing it for = -rc3 > is still reasonable with maintainer discretion (although once -rc3 land= s, we > want as little as possible to go into -rc4, even if our track record sa= ys we > will be unable to avoid -rc4 altogether). >=20 > I think that losing flags is likely enough to be a noticeable bug worth > fixing for 3.1, but I did not research when the problem was introduced,= so I > don't have a strong preference for 3.1 vs. 4.0. Maintainer in this case is Jason, so it's up to him. > --=20 > Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 > Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org