From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53227) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMvZB-00074e-NH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:55:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMvZ6-0007oQ-CT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:55:53 -0400 Received: from mail.valinux.co.jp ([210.128.90.3]:60887) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMvZ5-0007nv-Tp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:55:48 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:55:46 +0900 From: Isaku Yamahata Message-ID: <20130920075546.GP16551@valinux.co.jp> References: <5d53d839653bf4fd24d5cb56f6d24d3dc3f8f8a5.1378261891.git.yamahata@private.email.ne.jp> <5239B8A3.10305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5239B8A3.10305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] rdma: constify ram_chunk_{index, start, end} List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael R. Hines" Cc: Isaku Yamahata , quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, owasserm@redhat.com, mrhines@us.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:28:51AM -0400, Michael R. Hines wrote: > On 09/03/2013 10:32 PM, Isaku Yamahata wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata >> --- >> migration-rdma.c | 8 +++++--- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/migration-rdma.c b/migration-rdma.c >> index e71c10a..db5a908 100644 >> --- a/migration-rdma.c >> +++ b/migration-rdma.c >> @@ -511,19 +511,21 @@ static int qemu_rdma_exchange_send(RDMAContext *rdma, RDMAControlHeader *head, >> int *resp_idx, >> int (*callback)(RDMAContext *rdma)); >> >> -static inline uint64_t ram_chunk_index(uint8_t *start, uint8_t *host) >> +static inline uint64_t ram_chunk_index(const uint8_t *start, >> + const uint8_t *host) >> { >> return ((uintptr_t) host - (uintptr_t) start) >> RDMA_REG_CHUNK_SHIFT; >> } >> >> -static inline uint8_t *ram_chunk_start(RDMALocalBlock *rdma_ram_block, >> +static inline uint8_t *ram_chunk_start(const RDMALocalBlock *rdma_ram_block, >> uint64_t i) >> { >> return (uint8_t *) (((uintptr_t) rdma_ram_block->local_host_addr) >> + (i << RDMA_REG_CHUNK_SHIFT)); >> } >> >> -static inline uint8_t *ram_chunk_end(RDMALocalBlock *rdma_ram_block, uint64_t i) >> +static inline uint8_t *ram_chunk_end(const RDMALocalBlock *rdma_ram_block, >> + uint64_t i) >> { >> uint8_t *result = ram_chunk_start(rdma_ram_block, i) + >> (1UL << RDMA_REG_CHUNK_SHIFT); > > Isaku, you are sending lots of "little" patches which may or may not be > properly rebased upon previous patches. > > Could you please group your current patch series into a single series with a > descriptive cover letter along with the previous patches? > > If you need create a new patch specifically for RDMA before a previous > patch as been applied to my tree, then please include the old one into > the new patch series with a description and a "resend" in the title. > > Then I can review them at once apply them all to my tree > so the maintaner has an easier time. Okay, will do. Which branch should I watch? I'm aware of the following repo, but I'm not sure which branch to rebase. https://github.com/hinesmr/qemu.git thanks, > > Thanks, > - Michael > > -- yamahata