[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] 40p: LSI SCSI IRQ routing patch
From: |
David Gibson |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] 40p: LSI SCSI IRQ routing patch roll-up |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Sep 2018 11:22:32 +1000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) |
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:05AM +0100, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> 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 to
> use the modified API, plus I took the (for me) unusual step of running a full
> QEMU
> build with no target list and then run "make check" to double-check I hadn't
> missed
> anything obvious.
As an aside, can you please make that less unusual. I get patches
which break the build of some target other than the one the author was
thinking of pretty often, so I really think an all-targets build
should be pretty much the minimum standard for testing prior to
posting.
> So based upon this I'm quite confident the non-PPC parts won't
> cause any issues.
>
>
> ATB,
>
> Mark.
>
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] scsi: add lsi53c8xx_handle_legacy_cmdline() function, (continued)
- [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 3/5] scsi: remove unused lsi53c895a_create() and lsi53c810_create() functions, Mark Cave-Ayland, 2018/09/19
- [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 4/5] lsi53c895a: add optional external IRQ via qdev, Mark Cave-Ayland, 2018/09/19
- [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 2/5] scsi: move lsi53c8xx_create() callers to lsi53c8xx_handle_legacy_cmdline(), Mark Cave-Ayland, 2018/09/19
- [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 5/5] 40p: add fixed IRQ routing for LSI SCSI device, Mark Cave-Ayland, 2018/09/19
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 0/5] 40p: LSI SCSI IRQ routing patch roll-up, David Gibson, 2018/09/19