From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42747) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YMGZR-0004LB-LW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:46:14 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YMGZN-0000kl-CL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:46:13 -0500 Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com ([195.59.15.196]:30066) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YMGZN-0000kN-3u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:46:09 -0500 Message-ID: <54DE001B.9020908@imgtec.com> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 13:46:03 +0000 From: Leon Alrae MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1423821732-22542-1-git-send-email-leon.alrae@imgtec.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 00/14] target-mips queue List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , Aurelien Jarno On 13/02/2015 13:07, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 13 February 2015 at 10:01, Leon Alrae wrote: >> Hi, >> >> My current mips-next patch queue, mainly bug fixes and cleanups. >> >> Thanks, >> Leon >> >> Cc: Peter Maydell >> Cc: Aurelien Jarno >> >> The following changes since commit 449008f86418583a1f0fb946cf91ee7b4797317d: >> >> Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/awilliam/tags/vfio-update-20150210.0' into staging (2015-02-11 05:14:41 +0000) >> >> are available in the git repository at: >> >> git://github.com/lalrae/qemu.git tags/mips-20150213 >> >> for you to fetch changes up to a6081232704fa32d16ad1dca3f34abff4bb6435e: >> >> linux-user: correct stat structure in MIPS N32 (2015-02-12 16:11:16 +0000) > > Hi; I'm afraid that this conflicts with RTH's patchset that I've > applied in a way that's probably not too hard to sort out but > which I don't have time to try to fix up as part of the merge. > Can I ask you to rebase, retest and resend, please? Sure, no problem. > > PS: this pullreq appears to be an unsigned tag. You should > move to sending me signed pullrequests as soon as it's > convenient for you to do so, please. I wasn't aware that pullreqs should be gpg signed (I've just found an email about this in archives). Will do. Thanks, Leon