From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6092C56
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  2 Jun 2016 09:31:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27])
 by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Jun 2016 00:31:06 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,405,1459839600"; d="scan'208";a="820016172"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162])
 by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Jun 2016 00:31:00 -0700
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:31:05 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, jianfeng.tan@intel.com, huawei.xie@intel.com,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
 David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20160602073105.GS10038@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1457512409-24403-12-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp>
 <1464838185-21751-1-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1464838185-21751-1-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/6] Virtio-net PMD: QEMU QTest extension
	for container
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 07:31:09 -0000

On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 12:29:39PM +0900, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote:
> The patches will work on below patch series.
>  - [PATCH v5 0/8] virtio support for container
> 
> It seems his implementation will be changed a bit.
> So, this patch series are also going to be changed to follow his implementation.

Hi Tetsuya,

TBH, I was considering to reject your v4: the code was quite messy. But
this v5 changed my mind a bit: it's much cleaner.

But still, I'd ask do we really need 2 virtio for container solutions?

That results to the same question that I'm sure you have already
answered before: in which way your solution outweighs Jianfeng's?

The reason I want to ask again is: 1), I wasn't actively participating
the discussion in last release, besides some common comments on virtio,
2), maybe it's time to make a decision that should we take one solution
only, if so, which one, or should we take both?

Thomas is Cc'ed, hope he can help on the decision making.

	--yliu