On Wednesday, 3 May 2017 at 4:34 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:30:31AM +0800, Eli Qiao wrote: > > hi all, > > > > Thanks for helping reviewing for CAT support in the past days. > > > > I writing this email to ask for the plan in libvirt support. > > > > I think we’v discussed this early this year, and I’v proposed a patch set > > [1]. > > But don’t get merged because of some performance reason ? > > > > Then I proposed a redesign RFC[2] based on Martin’s cache branch, > > thans Martin for the reviewing, I can address them but the question here > > is it depends on Martin’s `cache` branch, which if for exposing host’s > > `cache` > > information in capabilities xml, and it doesn’t get merged ether, I feel > > helpless. > > > > > Martin posted review comments on your latest patches just a couple of days > ago, and you've not posted any newer version of the patches since then > that address those comments. > Yes, I see that and response, I will refine my RFC patch. I just worry about the dependencies. It’s long time and don’t get reviewed after the last post. https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2017-April/msg00541.html And Martin’s `cache` branch was not merged yet, that’s not under my control, this is my concern. > > > As CAT is a key feature which would be required by many customers and > > especially the OpenStack integration. > > > > > Regardless of what/who needs a feature, we're not going to rush to > merge patches if there are still outstanding issues that need fixing. > Agree. I would like to get some advice on which direction should go, with the new implementation, the dependency is a problem. > > > Would like to know the plan and get the some suggestions. > > > Carry on addressing the feedback provided & posting new versions of the > patches for review. > > Sure, I will continue working on that. BR, Eli Qiao
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
