On 8/30/23 11:14, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 8/30/23 10:31, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 08:29:33PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> The tails of the "vhost_user_set_vring_addr" and "vhost_user_set_u64"
>>> functions are now byte-for-byte identical. Factor the common tail out
>>
On 8/30/23 10:31, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 08:29:33PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> The tails of the "vhost_user_set_vring_addr" and "vhost_user_set_u64"
>> functions are now byte-for-byte identical. Factor the common tail out
>> to a
>> new function called "vhost_user_wr
On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 08:29:33PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
The tails of the "vhost_user_set_vring_addr" and "vhost_user_set_u64"
functions are now byte-for-byte identical. Factor the common tail out to a
new function called "vhost_user_write_msg".
This is purely refactoring -- no observable c
On 27/8/23 20:29, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
The tails of the "vhost_user_set_vring_addr" and "vhost_user_set_u64"
functions are now byte-for-byte identical. Factor the common tail out to a
new function called "vhost_user_write_msg".
This is purely refactoring -- no observable change.
Cc: "Michael S.
The tails of the "vhost_user_set_vring_addr" and "vhost_user_set_u64"
functions are now byte-for-byte identical. Factor the common tail out to a
new function called "vhost_user_write_msg".
This is purely refactoring -- no observable change.
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" (supporter:vhost)
Cc: Eugenio
