From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52567) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1diFNf-0007BK-9c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 03:38:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1diFNe-000534-1u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 03:38:15 -0400 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.232.25]:12581 helo=relay.sw.ru) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1diFNd-0004zI-Mw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 03:38:13 -0400 References: <20170804151440.320927-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> <3f9ef2bf-bd52-b2ef-4051-bea6c06d24ce@redhat.com> From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy Message-ID: <95284491-a0f3-c2d3-ed79-003f9ff4a047@virtuozzo.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:37:59 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3f9ef2bf-bd52-b2ef-4051-bea6c06d24ce@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/17] nbd client refactoring and fixing List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: mreitz@redhat.com, kwolf@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, den@openvz.org 17.08.2017 00:21, 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. > Is your BLOCK_STATUS series something that is in good enough shape to > post a preliminary version of it (the version you posted back in > February is now horribly out-of-date, with all the good cleanups you > have been doing in the meantime). I want to get a running start at > reviewing what I can to make sure we get improved NBD functionality into > 2.11. Every time I want to produce a new version of BLOCK_STATUS, I stumble on something and new 10-20 patches refactoring series appears) > > Also, please feel free to offer your Reviewed-by on other patches > (whether NBD-related or not). Speaking as the NBD maintainer, I welcome > any help I can get. And from personal experience, reviews tend to be > one of the largest bottlenecks in open source software - if you are > writing patches but not offering reviews, then you are adding to the > bottleneck so reviewers tend to set your patches aside for when they > have more time; while if you are actively offering reviews, then it is > obvious that you care about the project and your patch contributions > tend to have an easier time getting in. My personal rule of thumb is to > try and review at least 2 other patches for every one that I send, > although that is a rather ambitious goal and there's nothing wrong if > you can't commit to theh same level of effort. Thanks, I get the point, I'll try to do better. > >> 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 > Of course, parts of this will need rebasing based on what finally landed > in 2.10, but I can start reviewing what I can for this round. > -- Best regards, Vladimir