From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32994) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cTVMD-00014v-Nm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:07:34 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cTVM9-0004y1-Or for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:07:33 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4071) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cTVM9-0004xW-Hq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:07:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 17:07:27 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20170117170627-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1484276800-26814-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> <20170113175646-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20170114025958.GA14805@pxdev.xzpeter.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170114025958.GA14805@pxdev.xzpeter.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 00/14] VT-d: vfio enablement and misc enhances List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Xu Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, tianyu.lan@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, jasowang@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, bd.aviv@gmail.com On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:59:58AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 05:58:02PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:06:26AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > > > v3: > > > - fix style error reported by patchew > > > - fix comment in domain switch patch: use "IOMMU address space" rather > > > than "IOMMU region" [Kevin] > > > - add ack-by for Paolo in patch: > > > "memory: add section range info for IOMMU notifier" > > > (this is seperately collected besides this thread) > > > - remove 3 patches which are merged already (from Jason) > > > - rebase to master b6c0897 > > > > So 1-6 look like nice cleanups to me. Should I merge them now? > > That'll be great if you'd like to merge them. Then I can further > shorten this series for the next post. > > Regarding to the error_report() issue that Jason has mentioned, I can > touch them up in the future when needed - after all, most of the patch > content are about converting DPRINT()s into traces. > > Thanks! > > -- peterx I think I agree with Jason, it's best not to have guest behaviour trigger error_report. So pls address and I'll merge.