From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41049) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvoUn-0001I8-EQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:18:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvoUh-0003aG-He for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:18:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24144) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvoUh-0003Zs-AL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:18:23 -0500 Message-ID: <4F34FCF3.4080300@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:18:11 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201202100952.26104.paul@codesourcery.com> <4F34F567.3040309@redhat.com> <201202101109.03374.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 6/6] qemu_calculate_timeout: increase minimum timeout to 1h List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "avi@redhat.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Paul Brook , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On 02/10/2012 12:19 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > I think you are right and the right thing to do would be blocking > indefinitely. > However if slirp doesn't support it, we could have a timeout of 1000 if > CONFIG_SLIRP, otherwise block indefinitely. You could add a similar hack to qemu_bh_update_timeout for slirp_update_timeout. Paolo