From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34810 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUxKC-0006eZ-14 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:39:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUxKA-0007Ow-Tt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:39:43 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate03.web.de ([217.72.192.234]:40309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUxKA-0007OX-G5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:39:42 -0400 Message-ID: <4C2EE93B.8030003@web.de> Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 09:39:39 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Bug 599958] Re: Timedrift problems with Win7: hpet missing time drift fixups References: <20100629211802.16137.10587.malonedeb@soybean.canonical.com> <201007011645.18184.paul@codesourcery.com> <4C2CE393.3040203@codemonkey.ws> <201007012240.51967.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201007012240.51967.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig5A2BFC5C2B3ABC6C6474410E" Sender: jan.kiszka@web.de List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Brook Cc: Gleb Natapov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig5A2BFC5C2B3ABC6C6474410E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul Brook wrote: >> I really see no tangible objection to Jan's patches. They don't impac= t >> any other code. They don't inhibit flexibility in the infrastructure.= >> You might consider it to be a "hack" but so what. QEMU is filled with= >> hacks. It would be useless without them because there would be very >> little code. >=20 > I object strongly to anything that makes qemu_irq a message passing API= =2E > if you want message passing then you should not be using qemu_irq. Blueswirl objected to the straightforward return-value approach I first posted. You seems to be more open towards this, right? Still looks like I cannot make you both happy at the same time. So what to do? Jan --------------enig5A2BFC5C2B3ABC6C6474410E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkwu6TsACgkQitSsb3rl5xRV4QCePoeZOBXmx6F4HL+Tqn60WqVe HpsAn0u8ZGQ9TzzwAEYV9f0BNndVcwg/ =MB13 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig5A2BFC5C2B3ABC6C6474410E--