From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zheng Li Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.5] tools/oxenstored: Fix | vs & error in fd event handling Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 20:08:06 +0000 Message-ID: <54763326.7050705@zheng.li> References: <1417014580-27611-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <5475F3DF.2070907@zheng.li> <0CD34053-C7C1-423B-9D00-E455B7099968@citrix.com> <20141126184130.GB13384@laptop.dumpdata.com> <547623EE.2070303@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <547623EE.2070303@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Andrew Cooper , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Dave Scott Cc: Ian Jackson , Wei Liu , Ian Campbell , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 26/11/2014 19:03, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Strictly speaking Zheng, not being a maintainer, can't ack the patch, > given what I believe to be Xens current rules for these things. > However, as the author of the code and comment in this thread, his ack > can reasonably be considered equivalent to a Reviewed-by: I guess this > is just a matter of semantics. > > Furthermore, as we all share an office, I have already been through this > process informally, and have confirmed the fix under my Xen-4.5 based > XenServer branch. There appear to be 100% less "error -EINVAL" messages > in the logs. > Agreed. I was a bit confused by the "XXX-by" semantics. As Andy mentioned, he already went through the patch with me offline, so here is the line if more appropriate: Reviewed-by: Zheng Li Thanks, Zheng