Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] QEMU 1.1-rc2 release

[Peter Maydell]

On 15 May 2012 21:20, Anthony Liguori <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 05/15/2012 11:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> In this case it is a regression...

> At what point did it regress?  I don't recall win64 ever working uner TCG...

Sorry, I had in mind the mmap thing, and got confused with what
I was quoting.

>> Anyway, my point is not "these things must go in" but that it's very
>> hard to tell from this side whether a patch is in the state:
>>  (a) in your queue and will go into this rc
>>  (b) missed the boat for this rc but will be in the next
>>  (c) completely overlooked and needs pinging/yelling about
>>  (d) judged not important enough to justify fixing in this release
>
> It's it not tagged '1.1' than I am not considering it for 1.1.
>
> If it's tagged with 1.1 *and* in a subsystem with an active submaintainer, I
> would expect the submaintainer to handle it.  I do keep track of it though
> until someone responds with "Thanks, Applied." and will follow up with
> patches that fall into this category.

> If you've posted a patch for 1.1 and it's a couple days old without
> feedback, then you probably should ping the appropriate maintainer about it.
>
> FWIW, I don't see any pending 1.1 patches from you so I don't know if this
> is a theoretical concern or a practical one.

My current concern is
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/158556/
(submitted by Alex, although I see he forgot to tag it with "1.1").

I'll ping it...

-- PMM