Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/17] nbd client refactoring and fixing

[Eric Blake]

On 08/25/2017 05:10 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/04/2017 10:14 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> A bit more refactoring and fixing before BLOCK_STATUS series.
>> I've tried to make individual patches simple enough, so there are
>> a lot of them.
>>
>> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy (17):
>>   nbd/client: fix nbd_opt_go
>>   nbd/client: refactor nbd_read_eof
>>   nbd/client: refactor nbd_receive_reply
>>   nbd/client: fix nbd_send_request to return int
>>   block/nbd-client: get rid of ssize_t
>>   block/nbd-client: fix nbd_read_reply_entry
>>   block/nbd-client: refactor request send/receive
>>   block/nbd-client: rename nbd_recv_coroutines_enter_all
>>   block/nbd-client: move nbd_co_receive_reply content into
>>     nbd_co_request
>>   block/nbd-client: move nbd_coroutine_end content into nbd_co_request
>>   block/nbd-client: fix nbd_co_request: set s->reply.handle to 0 on
>>     error
>>   block/nbd-client: refactor nbd_co_request
>>   block/nbd-client: refactor NBDClientSession.recv_coroutine
>>   block/nbd-client: exit reply-reading coroutine on incorrect handle
>>   block/nbd-client: refactor reading reply
>>   block/nbd-client: drop reply field from NBDClientSession
>>   block/nbd-client: always return EIO on and after the first io channel
>>     error
> 
> I've pushed 1-5 and 7-10 onto my NBD staging branch for 2.11:
> 
>   git://repo.or.cz/qemu/ericb.git nbd

Correction - I've decided to take Stefan's patches first (since his
patch 1/3 was a bit more elegant at doing the same thing as your patch
10); that caused rebase conflicts for your patch 7 (which I simplified
by creating nbd_co_request as a wrapper rather than trying to inline its
parts), and my change to your patch 7 obsoletes the need for 9 or 10.  I
also placed your patch 8 before your patch 7 (if you don't like what I
changed on patch 7, it is now last in my NBD staging area, so I can more
easily drop it from my tree if you'd prefer to respin it differently).

> with a couple of changes squashed in as mentioned in individual patches;
> please double-check that it looks okay.  If so, then I will use that
> branch as the starting point for all NBD commits destined for 2.11,
> sending a pull request once the tree opens.
> 
> Patches 6 and 11 are somewhat subsumed by the work that went into 2.10,
> and the remaining patches are starting to cause enough conflicts that
> I'd prefer you complete the rebase of patches 12-17 and post a v2 on top
> of my staging branch.

These statements still hold; you'll need to rebase the rest of your
series on top of my tree.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature