From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NUixU-00062z-Sp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:47:04 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NUixP-0005zD-RC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:47:04 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33156 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUixP-0005z3-Ml for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:46:59 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.221.189]:40170) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NUixP-00024G-B9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:46:59 -0500 Received: by qyk27 with SMTP id 27so10067653qyk.20 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 07:46:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B4C996F.6030909@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:46:55 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/8] virtio-serial-bus: Add support for buffering guest output, throttling guests References: <1262849506-27132-6-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <20100108011231.GA5011@shareable.org> <20100108050351.GB8999@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20100108133503.GA19328@shareable.org> <20100111083443.GA6061@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20100111104553.GA4746@shareable.org> <20100111110410.GA13658@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20100111233356.GB30714@shareable.org> <20100112071612.GB19438@amit-x200.redhat.com> <4B4C8EA4.9080106@codemonkey.ws> <20100112151315.GA28039@amit-x200.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20100112151315.GA28039@amit-x200.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 01/12/2010 09:13 AM, Amit Shah wrote: > On (Tue) Jan 12 2010 [09:00:52], Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> On 01/12/2010 01:16 AM, Amit Shah wrote: >> >>> BTW I don't really want this too, I can get rid of it if everyone agrees >>> we won't support clipboard writes> 4k over vnc or if there's a better >>> idea. >>> >>> >> Why bother trying to preserve message boundaries? I think that's the >> fundamental question. >> > For the vnc clipboard copy-paste case, I explained that in the couple of > mails before in this thread. > It didn't make sense to me. I think the assumption has to be that the client can send corrupt data and the host has to handle it. Regards, Anthony Liguori > There might be other use-cases, I don't know about them though. > > Amit >