From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:32989) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcG77-0000T6-Vp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:12:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcG76-0001Ec-8p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:12:57 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:27752) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcG75-0001ER-Jn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:12:56 -0400 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5UCCsWd011822 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:12:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4E0C6844.70902@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:12:52 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E08231D.30506@redhat.com> <20110627081635.GN2731@bow.redhat.com> <4E083E8B.7010302@redhat.com> <20110627092036.GR2731@bow.redhat.com> <4E0AE9D7.6090706@redhat.com> <20110629092133.GL30873@bow.redhat.com> <4E0AFD7C.2050209@redhat.com> <20110629113812.GS30873@bow.redhat.com> <4E0C4F52.90405@redhat.com> <4E0C5423.2060208@redhat.com> <20110630114134.GH26431@bow.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20110630114134.GH26431@bow.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] qxl: add QXL_IO_UPDATE_MEM for guest S3&S4 support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Yonit Halperin , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hi, > My thoughts exactly. Any reason to support the old non async messages if we > do this? Yes. Backward compatibility. > The only difference with this approach is that we will have to do the reads from the > io thread of qemu, Hmm? Which reads? I'd add a completion callback to QXLInterface. cheers, Gerd