Rusty Russell wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 10:25:54 Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
In general I think we need to add another feature or even version
number ( I know you guys hate it).
The reason is - Let's say
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
In general I think we need to add another feature or even version
number ( I know you guys hate it).
The reason is - Let's say you dont change functionality but change
the irq protocol (for example the isr won't be zeroed on read), then
an old
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 09:20:36PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This patch implements a very naive virtio block device backend in QEMU.
There's a lot of room for future optimization. We need to merge a -disk patch
before we can provide a mechanism to expose this to users.
The latest
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 09:20:36PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This patch implements a very naive virtio block device backend in QEMU.
There's a lot of room for future optimization. We need to merge a -disk
patch
before we can provide a mechanism to expose
Avi Kivity wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 09:20:36PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This patch implements a very naive virtio block device backend in QEMU.
There's a lot of room for future optimization. We need to merge a
-disk patch
before we can provide a
Dor Laor wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
In general I think we need to add another feature or even version
number ( I know you guys hate it).
The reason is - Let's say you dont change functionality but change
the irq protocol (for example the isr won't be zeroed on read),
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 10:25:54 Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
In general I think we need to add another feature or even version
number ( I know you guys hate it).
The reason is - Let's say you dont change functionality but change
Anthony Liguori wrote:
This patch implements a very naive virtio block device backend in QEMU.
There's a lot of room for future optimization. We need to merge a -disk patch
before we can provide a mechanism to expose this to users.
Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff
Dor Laor wrote:
+
+if (1) {
+BlockDriverState *bs = bdrv_new(vda);
+if (bdrv_open(bs, /home/anthony/images/linux.img,
BDRV_O_SNAPSHOT))
+exit(1);
Can you add a printf to the exit(1). I had to gdb the code to find why
my qemu is not running no more (in earlier
