From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51144 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PAVkN-0007bV-4D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:42:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PAVaX-0004DH-A0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:32:23 -0400 Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:56720 helo=akado.ru) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PAVaX-0004C9-2n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:32:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:32:03 +0400 (MSD) From: malc Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 01/10] virtagent: add common rpc transport defs In-Reply-To: <4CC5FE75.4040502@codemonkey.ws> Message-ID: References: <1287773165-24855-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1287773165-24855-2-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4CC5F919.4000102@codemonkey.ws> <4CC5FE75.4040502@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: abeekhof@redhat.com, ryanh@us.ibm.com, agl@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Michael Roth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 10/25/2010 04:54 PM, malc wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > > > > > > On 10/22/2010 01:45 PM, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > > > Common code for sending/recieving RPCs via http over virtproxy channel. > > > > Eventually these will all be switched to asynchronous handlers to avoid > > > > deadlocks between qemu and the guest. For now we can usually get away > > > > with > > > > just doing asynchronous reads for http/RPC responses if we don't send > > > > large RPC requests to the guest (since these will likely get buffered > > > > rather than block or cause spinning on writes). > > > > > > [..snip..] > > > > > > > expressions need spaces. IOW, i=0; i > > i++. > > > > > > Avoid C++ isms like ++i. > > > > > Why? > > > > Because it creates arbitrary inconsistency. > That's rubbish. -- mailto:av1474@comtv.ru