On Dienstag, 7. Mai 2019 17:42:39 CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > > Sorry that I caused a bit of confusion, You were actually commenting > > mostly on v2 of the patch set, where my email client replaced the message > > IDs and hence screwed threading. > > > > This is v3 that I sent yesterday and which has correct threading: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01143.html > > For a reason yet to be investigated, I haven't received it yet...
Here are the archive links for latest v3 patch set [5(+1) patches total]: [PATCH v3 0/5] 9p: Fix file ID collisions: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01143.html [PATCH v3 1/5] 9p: mitigates most QID path collisions: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01142.html [PATCH v3 2/5] 9P: trivial cleanup of QID path collision mitigation: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01140.html [PATCH v3 3/5] 9p: persistency of QID path beyond reboots / suspensions: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01144.html [PATCH v3 4/5] 9p: use variable length suffixes for inode mapping: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01141.html [PATCH v3 5/5] 9p: adds virtfs 'vii' device parameter https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01138.html And the optional libvirt patch: [libvirt patch] qemu: adds support for virtfs 9p argument 'vii': https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-05/msg01223.html > > Please just have a glimpse on that v3 thread, and before I address the > > details that you requested (I have reviewed them all already and will > > address them), I would like you to ask you for a coarse feedback on > > design/features first. > > Because there are some things where I am unresolved on design level yet: > I'll try but probably not before next week. No problem, take your time! Best regards, Christian Schoenebeck
