From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57291) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDHuX-0003LV-H2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:37:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDHuS-00031l-NK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:37:01 -0400 Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.138]:58797) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDHuS-00031S-Kn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:36:56 -0400 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e8.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p9AFLYBi001540 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:21:34 -0400 Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (d03av06.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.245]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p9AFarVi253044 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:36:54 -0400 Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p9AFarxc013193 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:36:53 -0600 Message-ID: <4E931113.1000905@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:36:51 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E930409.6060000@us.ibm.com> <4E9305BD.70809@redhat.com> <4E930774.90806@us.ibm.com> <4E93089B.1080008@redhat.com> <4E930B55.70206@codemonkey.ws> <4E930E33.7090606@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4E930E33.7090606@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/1] [PULL] qemu-kvm.git uq/master queue List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org On 10/10/2011 10:24 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 10/10/2011 05:12 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> On 10/10/2011 10:00 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> On 10/10/2011 04:55 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>>> >>>> Hrm, sorry about that. In the future, it would be helpful to explicitly >>>> withdrawal a PULL request. >>>> >>>> Do you want me to revert? >>> >>> We'll send the revert together with the new patch. >>> >>>> FWIW, I think bumping the version is the right thing to do. >>> >>> Why? >> >> Because we still haven't fixed subsections. Juan's patches help but they can >> still result in sending bad data to and older QEMU that won't handle it properly. >> >> We need to figure out a proper fix for subsections, either Paolo's protocol >> change or moving subsections out to a detected section. > > Ok. So bumping the version is only right if we don't fix subsections. If we bump *any* version from 0.15 -> 1.0, then there's no point at all in having a subsection. If we break compatibility by using Paolo's new protocol, or doing subsections as sections, then there's no point in making it a subsection either. Regards, Anthony Liguori >