From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45665) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbPqs-0002SS-B4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:15:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbPqn-0000dx-CJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:15:06 -0400 Received: from [59.151.112.132] (port=4097 helo=heian.cn.fujitsu.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbPqn-0000cl-21 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:15:01 -0400 Message-ID: <55F69011.2070405@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:14:57 +0800 From: Yang Hongyang MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1441783481-17698-1-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> <55F65685.7080504@cn.fujitsu.com> <20150914090521.GD7611@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20150914090521.GD7611@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v10 00/10] Add a netfilter object and netbuffer filter List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Cc: thuth@redhat.com, zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com, jasowang@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com On 09/14/2015 05:05 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 01:09:25PM +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote: >> Hi Stefan,Jason, >> >> I've convert this series to base on QOM, and introducing NetQueue apis >> instead of using Netqueue internals as Stefan suggested. Could you please take a >> look at it? > > I won't look at the actual net filtering stuff since that's not my area > of expertize. I looked at the QOM related patches and that stuff all looks > good to me, with a few small nitpicks. Tanks! > >> Most of the details have been reviewed by Jason, and the whole filter logic >> isn't changed. >> One missing feature compared to previous versions is the multiqueue support, >> however, I've already implemented it, before sending it out, I need to get as >> many review comments as possible on this series, and addressing it, in order to >> reduce the iter round...And multiqueue support can be sent later as a seperate >> series if the base can go in first. If there has to be another few rounds, I >> will include multiqueue patches. > > > Regards, > Daniel > -- Thanks, Yang.