Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/9] Slightly rework our streams

On 04/15/2016 09:51 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: > This is not the big patch set that enables sparse streams. Not > just yet. I'm merely sending first few patches that prepare the > environment for that. These can, however, go in independent of > sparse streams. > > Michal Privoznik (9): > daemonClientStream: Use unsigned int to store stream @serial > daemon stream: Prefer bool over unsigned int var:1 > daemon stream: Convert @tx in daemonClientStream to bool > daemon stream: Remove useless empty lines from header file > virNetClientCallDispatchStream: Update comment > daemonStreamHandleRead: Rework to follow our coding pattern > Revert "rpc: Fix slow volume download (virsh vol-download)" > virnetclientstream: Process stream messages later > virStream{Recv,Send}All: Increase client buffer > > daemon/stream.c | 116 +++++++++++++++---------------- > daemon/stream.h | 2 - > src/libvirt-stream.c | 5 +- > src/rpc/virnetclient.c | 6 +- > src/rpc/virnetclientstream.c | 158 +++++++++++++++--------------------------- > src/rpc/virnetserverprogram.c | 12 ++-- > src/rpc/virnetserverprogram.h | 4 +- > 7 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 174 deletions(-) > I'm assuming for patch 2-3, the memory for the int -> bool conversions is all "local" to the client side... I've made comments on a few patches... I'm not an expert in this space by any stretch - hopefully Martin can look at patch 8 (and since it goes w/ 7 - they're a matched set. ACK for at at least 1-6... I'm OK with 7&8 (although I had a double check type question in 8 regarding the while loop and usage of 'want' as a loop control along with the st->rx that could have been Queue'd. I'm OK with patch 9 as well - I think it's fine - a bit more memory for a bit less back and forth. Standard tradeoff to me ;-). Perhaps someone else may have agita over it though, so lets just be sure no one does before pushing that one.