On 04/17/2015 10:01 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 27.03.2015 20:20, John Snow wrote:
>> In general, since transactions may reference QMP function helpers,
>> it would be nice for them to sit beneath them.
>>
>> This will avoid the need for forward declaring any QMP interfaces,
>> which would be aggrava
On 04/17/2015 12:01 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 27.03.2015 20:20, John Snow wrote:
In general, since transactions may reference QMP function helpers,
it would be nice for them to sit beneath them.
This will avoid the need for forward declaring any QMP interfaces,
which would be aggravating to upd
On 27.03.2015 20:20, John Snow wrote:
In general, since transactions may reference QMP function helpers,
it would be nice for them to sit beneath them.
This will avoid the need for forward declaring any QMP interfaces,
which would be aggravating to update in so many places.
Signed-off-by: John
In general, since transactions may reference QMP function helpers,
it would be nice for them to sit beneath them.
This will avoid the need for forward declaring any QMP interfaces,
which would be aggravating to update in so many places.
Signed-off-by: John Snow
---
blockdev.c | 2581 +++
