Am 26.07.2013 um 18:44 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > On 07/26/2013 10:26 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > >> This patch will probably conflict with Benoît's work on leaky bucket > >> throttling; can the two of you decide which one should go in first? Are > >> we trying to target both this series and leaky bucket throttling for 1.6? > > > > If you complete the review before I leave today, I might still send a > > pull request, but as I'm going to disable blockdev-add and the new > > options once again for 1.6, it doesn't really matter that much. > > In other words, just as it was in 1.5, the new parser is cool enough to > implement the framework now to ease backport efforts, but untested > enough that we'd rather defer use of that framework until after we are > back out of freeze.
Right. Before actually committing to the interface, I'd like you to have some real libvirt code running on it. I assume that's doable in the 1.7 time frame, right? > > Benoît's series is for 1.7 as well, if I understood Stefan correctly. He > > Even though the latest subject line requests for-1.6? > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-07/msg04005.html Yes, it was discussed on IRC, Benoît will target 1.7 now. > > said he was going to merge a bug fix part of it for 1.6 and leave the > > rest for 1.7. (I haven't been following the throttling series myself, > > that's why I can't comment in much more detail.) > > I guess I also need to comment on that series - we're late enough that > bug fixes are okay, but new options are risky; and the tail end of that > series adds new options to throttling as part of switching to a new > algorithm. Indeed, adding new options and switching the whole algorithm that late in the cycle is something that I would find a little bit too scary. Kevin