On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 02:08:23PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 03.02.2016 um 18:06 hat Daniel P. Berrange geschrieben: > > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 05:33:16PM +0100, Max Reitz wrote: > > > We have to introduce a new object (BlockdevOptionsNbd) for several > > > reasons: > > > - Neither of InetSocketAddress nor UnixSocketAddress alone is > > > sufficient, because both are supported > > > - We cannot use SocketAddress because NBD does not support an fd, > > > and because it is not a flat union which BlockdevOptionsNbd is > > > > With my patch series that converts NBD to use QIOChannel, all the > > entry points for client & server *do* take a SocketAddress struct > > to provide address info. So internally the code does in fact allow > > use of an FD, if there were a way to specify it a the QAPI level... > > > > eg see > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-01/msg04159.html > > That's patch 1 of a series that has a few more dependencies. Can the > patch be applied without the rest of the series (and without the > dependencies) so that we don't have to wait for a very long time with > Max's patches?
Paolo ackd the main nbd series, so we're just waiting for the CLI patch series it depends on https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-02/msg00296.html In terms of merging the NBD series, the bare minimum is the qom patch and the --object arg support. I could rebase the NBD series to just include those two directly, since they're basically ready: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-02/msg00297.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-02/msg00302.html Eric ACK'd the second one, and the fixes for the first one were trivial. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
