From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36291 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PxJuP-0002f0-KV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:58:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxJuO-0002y6-DB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:58:37 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]:64154) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxJuO-0002xx-8U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:58:36 -0500 Received: by qyk10 with SMTP id 10so551735qyk.4 for ; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 05:58:35 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <4D778787.1020606@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:58:31 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1299528642-23631-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1299528642-23631-2-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1299528642-23631-2-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH v7 01/16] Move code related to fd handlers into utility functions List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Roth Cc: agl@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, markus_mueller@de.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, abeekhof@redhat.com, aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com On 03/07/2011 09:10 PM, Michael Roth wrote: > This allows us to implement an i/o loop outside of vl.c that can > interact with objects that use qemu_set_fd_handler() I must say I really dislike the patches 1..3. It's _really_ getting the QEMU NIH worse. While it is not really possible to get a new shiny mainloop infrastructure in QEMU like snapping fingers (and I'm not sure the glib mainloop will ever happen there), there is no reason not to adopt glib's infrastructure in virtagent. While cooperation between QEMU and virtagent is close, it is IMHO a substantially separate project that can afford starting from a clean slate. If anybody disagrees, I'd be happy to hear their opinion anyway! I'm sorry I'm saying this only now and I've been ignoring this series until v7. Paolo