Hello Hans,
04.07.2017 16:57, Michael Thayer wrote:
[...]
> Of course, in practice there is always the risk of accidental
> dependencies on current behaviour in all parts of the kernel-user
> interface, but in the end it was your choice to try to duplicate an
> interface created by several people
Hello Hans,
04.07.2017 14:24, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04-07-17 11:46, Michael Thayer wrote:
>> Hello Hans,
>>
>> 04.07.2017 08:55, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> [Discussion of inconsistent wait event cancelling code in VBoxGuest.]
>>> So some remarks about this, I was thinking that *maybe*
Hi,
On 01-07-17 21:53, Michael Thayer wrote:
Hello Hans,
27.06.2017 20:46, Hans de Goede wrote:
[...]
On 06/27/2017 05:50 PM, Michael Thayer wrote:
[...]
27.06.2017 15:17, Hans de Goede wrote:
[Discussion of 3D problems with Fedora 25 and 26 guests.]
Back to 3d passthrough any idea why
Hi,
On 04-07-17 11:46, Michael Thayer wrote:
Hello Hans,
04.07.2017 08:55, Hans de Goede wrote:
[Discussion of inconsistent wait event cancelling code in VBoxGuest.]
So some remarks about this, I was thinking that *maybe* the old
behavior is on purpose, imagine the following:
1) cancel, no
Hello Hans,
04.07.2017 08:55, Hans de Goede wrote:
[Discussion of inconsistent wait event cancelling code in VBoxGuest.]
> So some remarks about this, I was thinking that *maybe* the old
> behavior is on purpose, imagine the following:
>
> 1) cancel, no waiters,
Hi Michael,
Thank you for looking into this.
On 04-07-17 08:14, Michael Thayer wrote:
Hello Hans,
03.07.2017 20:49, Michael Thayer wrote:
[Discussion of incorrect looking wait code in VBoxGuest.cpp.]>
I did not get any response when I asked around about this. Reading the
code (quite a bit
Hello Hans,
03.07.2017 20:49, Michael Thayer wrote:
[Discussion of incorrect looking wait code in VBoxGuest.cpp.]>
> I did not get any response when I asked around about this. Reading the
> code (quite a bit of work, as you presumably discovered too; fortunately
> the user-space part is a bit
