On 05/19/2010 11:20 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
It's time we get a proper bugzilla.qemu.org for both qemu and qemu-kvm
that can be used sanely. If you ask nicely you might even get a virtual
instance of bugzilla.kernel.org which works quite nicely.
That would be my preference too but
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:52:36AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This should be filed in launchpad as a qemu bug and it should be tested
against the latest git. This bug sounds like we're using an int to
represent sector offset somewhere but there's not enough info in the bug
report to
On 05/19/2010 03:20 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:52:36AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This should be filed in launchpad as a qemu bug and it should be tested
against the latest git. This bug sounds like we're using an int to
represent sector offset somewhere but
On Monday 17 May 2010 22:23:46 Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
Perceived long standing bugs that nobody seems to care about. There are a few,
one of which is the 1TB [1] bug
On 05/18/2010 01:59 AM, Brian Jackson wrote:
On Monday 17 May 2010 22:23:46 Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
Perceived long standing bugs that nobody seems to care
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
- Slipping 0.13 release out to July 1st.
- Block I/O performance (high CPU consumption)
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
- Slipping 0.13 release out to July 1st.
What is
On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's
On 05/18/2010 09:55 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please
Markus Armbruster arm...@redhat.com writes:
[...]
- set_link
Patch posted weeks ago, still not merged.
Correction: it got merged weeks ago, as commit 5369e3c0. I got
confused.
[...]
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to
On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:41 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/17/2010 10:23 PM,
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:00:40PM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:41 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 09:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at
On 05/18/2010 11:16 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The must haves are blockdev_add, and the commit/delvm/loadvm/savevm
stuff, since they're already in use.
The problem I fear is that we're aiming for a moving target here.
eg, by the time QEMU 0.13 comes out libvirt may have received patches
On 05/18/2010 05:34 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
No. I don't think our goal is to ever fully convert monitor commands
to QMP. Some commands simply don't make sense as QMP commands (like x
and xp).
Examining memory does make sense for QMP, although it is already
available through the gdb
On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:16:54 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:00:40PM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:41 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori
On Tuesday 18 May 2010 08:52:36 Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 01:59 AM, Brian Jackson wrote:
On Monday 17 May 2010 22:23:46 Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
* Brian Jackson (i...@theiggy.com) wrote:
On Tuesday 18 May 2010 08:52:36 Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 01:59 AM, Brian Jackson wrote:
On Monday 17 May 2010 22:23:46 Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of
On 05/18/2010 12:31 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:34 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
No. I don't think our goal is to ever fully convert monitor commands
to QMP. Some commands simply don't make sense as QMP commands (like
x and xp).
Examining memory does make sense for QMP, although
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
If we have a lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
thanks,
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
20 matches
Mail list logo
