From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37753) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4l2L-0000EN-83 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 05:53:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4l2K-00063a-Ex for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 05:53:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:53:10 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20171018115310.44eec1ed.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20171018082347.GA5150@bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20171017140453.51099-1-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171017171315.7afc5a59.cohuck@redhat.com> <4ac6acdd-ccbf-3ff7-b6ec-5bdbc5456665@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171018082347.GA5150@bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/7] improve error handling for IO instr List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Dong Jia Shi Cc: Halil Pasic , qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Pierre Morel , Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 16:23:47 +0800 Dong Jia Shi wrote: > * Halil Pasic [2017-10-17 18:19:20 +0200]: > > [...] > > > >> Testing > > >> ======= > > >> > > >> Nothing happened since v2 except for a quick smoke test. Dong Jia gave v2 > > >> a spin with a focus on vfio-ccw. @Dong Jia I would appreciate some proper > > >> testing, especially regarding the changes in vfio-ccw (patch #3). > > > > > > Looks sane to me (if needed, I can fix up the minor things I found). > > > > > > In addition to some testing, I'd appreciate some review from others as > > > well. > > > > > > > Of course, I'm fine with the fixes (won't answer individually). I think > > both Dong Jia and Pierre have already put enough work in this to be credited > > with a tag, so I really hope they will get around to review this. I would > > be especially happy with an Tested-by: Dong Jia since this series is quite > > under-tested, and the changes in vfio-ccw aren't just minor. > > > > Of course I could come up with a test setup myself, but I hope Dong Jia > > already has one, and he is certainly more involved with vfio-ccw. > > > Using Conny's s390-next branch + this series (#2-#7), I didn't notice > any obvious problem during my fio test. So for the vfio-ccw related > part: > Tested-by: Dong Jia Shi Thanks! To which patches may I add the tag? :)