From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] Display IO topology when PXM data is
 available (plus some cleanup)
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:17:09 +0000
Message-ID: <1427123829.21742.281.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1426802044-19444-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
	<55100A26.7080801@linaro.org>
	<551031B0020000780006C984@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<CAFLBxZZ5JWYGBRJ4Vvj4VC7y8bf8GqqvsLrjPgGtfwyiLHg2=A@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAFLBxZZ5JWYGBRJ4Vvj4VC7y8bf8GqqvsLrjPgGtfwyiLHg2=A@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: George Dunlap <dunlapg@umich.edu>
Cc: elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 14:38 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 23.03.15 at 13:42, <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> It would be nice to at least build test it ARM/ARM64 before pushing
> >> patches which modify common code.
> >
> > I try to remember that, but do not always succeed. Really I'd expect
> > people to not even submit such patches.
> 
> To be fair, this is the reason we have a push gate; people who want
> only non-broken builds should use master rather than staging.

Agreed.

> But given how long the test cycles take, it would be better if people
> submitting patches did some smoke-testing first.

Also agreed, although it can be hard to think "ARM" when you see a
diffstat containing xen/common/foo.c unless you actually work on ARM day
to day.

Ian.