On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 08:33:01PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote:
> > * Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >> There are some places that binded "return path" with postcopy. Let's be
> >> prepared for its usage even without postcopy. This
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote:
> * Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> There are some places that binded "return path" with postcopy. Let's be
>> prepared for its usage even without postcopy. This patch mainly did this
>> on source side.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu
* Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote:
> There are some places that binded "return path" with postcopy. Let's be
> prepared for its usage even without postcopy. This patch mainly did this
> on source side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu
> ---
> standalone patch isolated from the
Peter Xu wrote:
> There are some places that binded "return path" with postcopy. Let's be
> prepared for its usage even without postcopy. This patch mainly did this
> on source side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu
> ---
> standalone patch isolated from the
There are some places that binded "return path" with postcopy. Let's be
prepared for its usage even without postcopy. This patch mainly did this
on source side.
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu
---
standalone patch isolated from the return path series. ok to be picked
up in case one