From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WINUo-0002hF-Sn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:16:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WINUg-0002r9-06 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:16:50 -0500 Received: from e06smtp17.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.113]:46479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WINUf-0002qo-NL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:16:41 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp17.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:16:39 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C72C017D805A for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.252]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s1PJGOX966519204 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:16:25 GMT Received: from d06av11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s1PJGZd8025426 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:16:36 -0700 Message-ID: <530CEBD5.3030308@de.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:15:33 +0100 From: Christian Borntraeger MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1390405693-15696-1-git-send-email-jjherne@us.ibm.com> <52F3A801.2030405@de.ibm.com> <530CA9F6.6010202@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <530CA9F6.6010202@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390: Storage key global access List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: jjherne@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "Jason J. Herne" , afaerber@suse.de, agraf@suse.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 25/02/14 15:34, Jason J. Herne wrote: > Christian, at one point you mentioned that it might be helpful to see this patch in the context of the rest of the hotplug patches. If you still feel this way let me know and I'll post the 4-patch series. If not, I still propose this one for s390-next. Thanks :). Do you feel your series is ready for upstream, then yet please post the whole series. Posting independent things is good, but I feel that the storage key rework makes more sense if the followup patches make clear why. Christian