On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 10:29 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 05:12:32PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > Could be a good idea. Although I'm not sure what to do with > > all types, maybe we can restrict what is supported. > > > > > Is this wider re-factoring something that can wait for the next > > > developer cycle? > > > > I would say so. It's not quite trivial to do nicely since > > things are a bit tangled between util/async and replay. > > > > > >> I had started on a conversion once but not completed it. > > > >> I could resurrect if there is agreement on the API? > > > > > > I would certainly welcome it being cleaned up. The supported replay > > > devices are very piecemeal at the moment. > > > > I'll tidy up and post an RFC for how the new API might look. > > > > Thanks, > > Nick > > Fundamentally it's virtio net, up to Jason.
It seems it has been in the pull request from Alex Bennée. > I don't like messy > APIs and people tend to get distracted and not fix them up > if one does not make this a blocker. +1 > > -- > MST Thanks >
