[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] 40p: LSI SCSI IRQ routing patch roll-up

From: Mark Cave-Ayland
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] 40p: LSI SCSI IRQ routing patch roll-up
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 06:34:05 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0

On 20/09/2018 05:26, Peter Maydell wrote:

> On 19 September 2018 at 19:55, David Gibson <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 06:20:56PM +0100, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
>>> Here is the final set of 40p LSI SCSI routing patches with reviewer tags
>>> rebased upon ppc-for-3.1 as requested by David.
>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <address@hidden>
>> So, when I requested that, I hadn't realized there were arm patches in
>> here.  I'm not terribly comfortable taking hw/arm patches through the
>> ppc tree.  So I'm not really sure our best way forward for merging
>> this.
> The arm changes are only the 2-line refactorings in patch 2
> that touch a couple of arm boards (as well as an hppa one and a
> ppc one). I think the simplest thing is for you to take the
> whole set through ppc; otherwise we'd have to split up patch 2,
> take patch 1 through some tree, the various pieces of patch 2
> through multiple trees and then 3-5 through ppc once those had
> all landed. Since it's an obviously-correct refactoring rather
> than a significant change to the boards, that seems like overkill.
> You can have my
> Acked-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> for the arm parts.

I can confirm from my side that the changes are a simple mechanical change over 
use the modified API, plus I took the (for me) unusual step of running a full 
build with no target list and then run "make check" to double-check I hadn't 
anything obvious. So based upon this I'm quite confident the non-PPC parts won't
cause any issues.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]