From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36474) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YST2o-0002Ft-10 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:18:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YST2i-0007qc-85 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:18:09 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42091 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YST2i-0007qH-1q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:18:04 -0500 Message-ID: <54F48D39.6050402@suse.de> Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:18:01 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1424894306-26740-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <54F48123.5040106@suse.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 00/11] X86 patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Eduardo Habkost , QEMU Developers Am 02.03.2015 um 16:30 schrieb Peter Maydell: > On 3 March 2015 at 00:26, Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: >> Am 02.03.2015 um 16:19 schrieb Peter Maydell: >>> On 26 February 2015 at 04:58, Eduardo Habkost w= rote: >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Those patches were reviewed some time ago, and Paolo suggested I sub= mit them >>>> through my own tree. So, here is my first x86 pull request. :) >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Applied, thanks. >> >> Why? You yourself had objections against 08/11, no? And replacement >> series are already on the list. >=20 > Because nobody followed up to this cover letter to say "don't apply thi= s". That's pretty much what I replied to 04/11, and I expected you to see that, in particular since you were on CC and chimed in. :/ I had some of Eduardo's alternative patches queued already and will look into fixing this mess... > I process pullreqs in first-in-first-out order and I rely on > submitters (or others) letting me know if there's a reason not to > apply something, and on people not submitting pullreqs including > patches which have got negative review on list :-( In this case it was Eduardo's first pull request, with overlap between qom-cpu and target-i386 responsibilities and Paolo having given an Rb for a full APIC movement series rather than the individual patches I pointed out. That requires a bit more review. Eduardo, I also notice that your tag luckily does not match the above description in your cover letter. That section is supposed to be filled in by git-request-pull from the tag, not hand-edited, and should be a summary of what changes the pull includes, not who reviewed it. You can place any additional comments above the generated template. Andreas --=20 SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG N=C3=BCrnberg)