[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] qdev & hw/core owner? (was Re: [PATCH v19 7/

From: Andreas Färber
Subject: Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] qdev & hw/core owner? (was Re: [PATCH v19 7/9] machine: add properties to compat_props incrementaly)
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 12:22:41 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0

Am 12.02.2016 um 10:17 schrieb Marcel Apfelbaum:
> On 02/11/2016 09:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:51:07AM +0200, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2016 09:49 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 12:55:22PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>>>> On 04/02/2016 12:41, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>>>>> You're talking about machine, right? Some time ago I had proposed
>>>>>>> Marcel
>>>>>>> who initially worked on it, but I'm fine with anyone taking it.
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>> For some (but not all) core qdev parts related to the (stalled) QOM
>>>>>>> migration I've been taking care of via qom-next. Last time this
>>>>>>> came up
>>>>>>> you didn't want anyone to be M: for qdev, so maybe we can use R:
>>>>>>> so that
>>>>>>> at least people automatically get CC'ed and we avoid this recurring
>>>>>>> discussion?
>>>>>> I might have changed my mind on that.  You definitely should be M:
>>>>>> for qdev.
>>>>>> Paolo
>>>>> If Andreas wants to, that's also fine. Several maintainers are
>>>>> better than one.
>>>> *If* the maintainers are all willing and able to work together.
>>> No problem here from my point of view :)
>> No problem to me, too. :)
>> I am going to be away from work for 15 days starting on Tuesday
>> Feb 16th. So if Marcel wants to start queueing patches already,
>> please be my guest. I will be able to help on that after I'm
>> back.
> Hi,
> If there are only a few patches on the mailing list, they can wait.
> If the number will grow I'll send a pull request.
> So the MAINTAINER file should look like this, right?
> Regarding qdev, Andreas, I also think you are the most qualified
> to take it, will you?
> index 2d6ee17..a86491a 100644
> @@ -1200,6 +1200,13 @@ F: docs/*qmp-*
>  F: scripts/qmp/
>  T: git git://repo.or.cz/qemu/armbru.git qapi-next
> +Machine
> +M: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
> +M: Marcel Apfelbaum <address@hidden>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/core/machine.c
> +F: include/hw/boards.h
> +

Fine with me, ack.

For qdev.c itself I prefer not to create a misleading "QDev" section but
rather just proposed a first step to split up qdev.c not just into
common vs. system-only code but also in better maintainable subareas.
That's targeted at having a section like "Core device API" covering a
to-be-created device.c with myself plus some backup as maintainer, then
Igor/mst/whomever for "Device hotplug interface" or the like.
qdev-system.c we could consider to split up so that the block/net/char
specific parts can be assigned clear maintainers - haven't investigated
that part yet. In the meantime we could simply create multiple sections
covering different aspects of qdev* files.


SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)

reply via email to

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