From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PULL 0/7] ppc patch queue 2013-03-22 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 18:16:21 -0500 Message-ID: <1364253381.26945.20@snotra> References: <1364250070.26945.18@snotra> <1364252043.26945.19@snotra> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: , "kvm@vger.kernel.org mailing list" , Gleb Natapov , Marcelo Tosatti To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-Reply-To: (from agraf@suse.de on Mon Mar 25 17:59:39 2013) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 03/25/2013 05:59:39 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 25.03.2013, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On 03/25/2013 05:32:11 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> On 25.03.2013, at 23:21, Scott Wood wrote: > >> > -next? These are bugfixes, at least partially for regressions > from 3.8 (that I pointed out before the bugs were merged!), that > should go into master. > >> > > >> > Also, what about: > >> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/226227/ > >> > > >> > You've got all four patches in kvm-ppc-3.9 as of a few weeks ago > -- will you be requesting a pull for that soon? > >> Sigh. I guess I've screwed up the whole "let's make -next an > unusable tree and fix regressions in a separate one" workflow again. > Sorry for that. > >> Since the patches already trickled into kvm's next branch, all we > can do now is to wait for them to come back through stable, right? > Marcelo, Gleb? > > > > Well, you can still submit that kvm-ppc-3.9 pull request. :-) > > I can, but nobody would pull it, as it'd create ugly merge commits > when 3.10 opens That's a lousy excuse for leaving bugs unfixed. -Scott