On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 12:38 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Cole Robinson <crobinso@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Code looks good to me but I skimmed it. You labelled this an RFC... are you > > waiting for design comments from other people or should I do a full review? > > > Looking through some of the comments [1] on the previous versions of > the QEMU patch set for the QMP command, it seems one essential thing > to get a lock on would be if the interface is sufficient that the QEMU > code should be merged. > > So if you or others can verify that part, then that's more urgent than > fine combing through the libvirt code at this point, in my humble > opinion. > > [1]: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-03/msg05272.html Christoffer, thanks a lot for bringing this up! While I failed to mention it in the cover letter (my bad), the fact that Peter had asked for an ACK to the interface from libvirt's side was one of the reasons for sending out this series sooner rather than later. Maybe Cole, having skimmed my RFC patches, can provide an explicit ACK to the QMP interface? I don't feel confident enough to provide anything more than a weak ACK myself. Note that v6, posted by Peter earlier today[1], changes the QMP interface a bit... I believe the changes are not big enough that updating this series to deal with the changes would be an issue though. Cheers. [1] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-03/msg05441.html -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list