From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42055) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TxERl-0005RG-Oo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:17:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TxERk-0003Pu-DR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:17:45 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62003) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TxERk-0003PA-5l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:17:44 -0500 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 r0LAHhAN005895 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:17:43 -0500 Message-ID: <50FD15C4.9060508@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:17:40 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1969801593.8205260.1358530385700.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1969801593.8205260.1358530385700.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/12] mirror: perform COW if the cluster size is bigger than the granularity List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com Am 18.01.2013 18:33, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > >> Am 18.01.2013 17:22, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >>> I haven't written a testcase for it, it's tricky but should be >>> doable. >>> Do you want me to respin, or can it be done as a followup? >> >> I think I would prefer a respin, but if you think otherwise, I won't >> insist. > > Okay, I'll respin. I'll just note that this series now is in danger of > missing 1.4 (after 1.2 and 1.3) because only Laszlo and Eric gave it a > decent review in the six months since it was first posted. > > Had I been employed by any other company, I'd probably just have kept > the code in house and forgotten about upstream. I hope this doesn't imply that you feel I'm happy or even just indifferent about it. This is just what happens when you get a huge numbers of patches and have only very few reviewers. I hope it has got a bit better since Stefan supports me in maintaining the block layer, but I'm afraid we're still not good enough with it. Any helpful suggestions are appreciated. Kevin