From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 2002:a5d:4301:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id h1-v6csp1633963wrq; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:28:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLWm5z8FvLSQrbfAncaSIwCOycponJoJrZd1ZP2+nfgUj1mVc5aMbuWvXevqQCgDRve/NAm X-Received: by 2002:a37:66c5:: with SMTP id a188-v6mr1019242qkc.201.1528957682959; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:28:02 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1528957682; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=nfTcwFYQ/V5i8NZAO0aPpftP5SIbh07acx0rND1voB7XpAPFw9j7yA8i9t3f3LT3qy e8SgChsX5s13jvKGV+HruFGVpjrszgSMOsZjl7z2qXgaAu/oNM4XbOmga5ZhTokP//cB QxU/OqU46dBMhSF5DzUOOTBhsYElvMeE3EiMbwiSMgrYJoRyvwINmQJpjUG6vlFm//NX ITVgtncN4hVY9Ni1QlmdNhTqStfWKsY5aVd5SFF33HTUo+TluSj0mM0FkgCaWunf6UH6 0By+P5jgFM5/swAMexzCEinKS9G5uPDgZQe3TqsCgYov9J41pqULMGEFcMkPeipFFbZ+ IOXA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=sender:errors-to:cc:list-subscribe:list-help:list-post:list-archive :list-unsubscribe:list-id:precedence:subject :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:to:arc-authentication-results; bh=n9Zji2LLsVgeJqdZwGxjbzwMQBdzh1rRT1zad/hUvJw=; b=FH+dNTYdcPUngx9OcKSiaZRYwgVh5iLvx9zqVDBgQ5urRNXWx+qNumNgJgNtS/0PLN 6O2w1jDNnjxyxCJifuj+DbglKwynTv5pxv+x8Jt1PFvgDb8e84ggFF0okT+q9mJCexmk 5E619TDBBXAgpoNjauf0IJHIqBY81wdB07wX9h7a68FsCciovxHEOjWP0Agr2Gtj771g kLJQVIfBd3o6P5SgYdaTIc4mNKsL7UEUliidh2DGopge+UOFpSvzTYgl/N00QJ8ecPeT NkcZt29K0Tr44pmMSnnACCnUq4idXEXyMw6Kibb6VeX19A331fxG9s8Ba9QS/dh2hKVW aQUg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org. [2001:4830:134:3::11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 27-v6si4260619qkp.140.2018.06.13.23.28.02 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:4830:134:3::11; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: from localhost ([::1]:38526 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjm-0002mm-Eo for alex.bennee@linaro.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:28:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43260) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjf-0002mT-Kg for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:27:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjc-0006vi-Fm for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:27:55 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:48000 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjc-0006vU-Ae; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:27:52 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADECD4023334; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 06:27:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-116-69.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.69]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD2AA111D3CE; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 06:27:47 +0000 (UTC) To: Laszlo Ersek , eric.auger.pro@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, peter.maydell@linaro.org References: <1528879723-24675-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <1528879723-24675-10-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <8bf1bccc-b32a-9982-6123-b644c41a96d3@redhat.com> From: Auger Eric Message-ID: <33a3fa10-bf1a-45cd-73bd-403cbd8d4792@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:27:46 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8bf1bccc-b32a-9982-6123-b644c41a96d3@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.3 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.6]); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 06:27:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.6]); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 06:27:51 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'10.11.54.3' DOMAIN:'int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com' HELO:'smtp.corp.redhat.com' FROM:'eric.auger@redhat.com' RCPT:'' X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 66.187.233.73 Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 9/9] hw/arm/virt: Add virt-3.0 machine type X-BeenThere: qemu-arm@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: drjones@redhat.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, zhaoshenglong@huawei.com Errors-To: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-arm" X-TUID: XfH5blCwaosL Hi Laszlo, On 06/13/2018 11:05 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 06/13/18 10:48, Eric Auger wrote: > >> PATCH: merge of ECAM and VCPU extension >> - Laszlo reviewed the ECAM changes but I dropped his R-b >> due to the squash > > Was there any particular reason why the previous patch set (with only > the ECAM enlargement) couldn't be merged first? To be honest I'm not > super happy when my R-b is dropped for non-technical reasons; it seems > like wasted work for both of us. > > Obviously if there's a technical dependency or some other reason why > committing the ECAM enlargement in separation would be *wrong*, that's > different. Even in that case, wouldn't it be possible to keep the > initial virt-3.0 machtype addition as I reviewed it, and then add the > rest in an incremental patch? Sorry about that. My fear was about migration. We would have had 2 virt 3.0 machine models not supporting the same features. While bisecting migration we could have had the source using the high mem ECAM and the destination not supporting it. So I preferred to avoid this trouble by merging the 2 features in one patch. However I may have kept your R-b restricting its scope to the ECAM stuff. Thanks Eric > > Thanks, > Laszlo > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43271) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjh-0002mt-T7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:27:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTLjg-0006wS-VL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 02:27:57 -0400 References: <1528879723-24675-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <1528879723-24675-10-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <8bf1bccc-b32a-9982-6123-b644c41a96d3@redhat.com> From: Auger Eric Message-ID: <33a3fa10-bf1a-45cd-73bd-403cbd8d4792@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:27:46 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8bf1bccc-b32a-9982-6123-b644c41a96d3@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 9/9] hw/arm/virt: Add virt-3.0 machine type List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laszlo Ersek , eric.auger.pro@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, peter.maydell@linaro.org Cc: wei@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, zhaoshenglong@huawei.com Hi Laszlo, On 06/13/2018 11:05 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 06/13/18 10:48, Eric Auger wrote: > >> PATCH: merge of ECAM and VCPU extension >> - Laszlo reviewed the ECAM changes but I dropped his R-b >> due to the squash > > Was there any particular reason why the previous patch set (with only > the ECAM enlargement) couldn't be merged first? To be honest I'm not > super happy when my R-b is dropped for non-technical reasons; it seems > like wasted work for both of us. > > Obviously if there's a technical dependency or some other reason why > committing the ECAM enlargement in separation would be *wrong*, that's > different. Even in that case, wouldn't it be possible to keep the > initial virt-3.0 machtype addition as I reviewed it, and then add the > rest in an incremental patch? Sorry about that. My fear was about migration. We would have had 2 virt 3.0 machine models not supporting the same features. While bisecting migration we could have had the source using the high mem ECAM and the destination not supporting it. So I preferred to avoid this trouble by merging the 2 features in one patch. However I may have kept your R-b restricting its scope to the ECAM stuff. Thanks Eric > > Thanks, > Laszlo >