From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50462) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRETs-0004rM-Um for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 05:51:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRETn-00008o-KT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 05:51:08 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:57393) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRETn-00007k-CY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 05:51:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:50:28 +0100 From: Samuel Ortiz Message-ID: <20181126105028.GA4393@caravaggio> References: <1542882574-109418-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20181123111017-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20181126113125.30275735@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181126113125.30275735@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] acpi: RSDP: fix checksum calculations List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, drjones@redhat.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 11:31:25AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 11:11:50 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 11:29:32AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > * arm/virt is broken but it looks like linux doesn't care, lets fix it anyways > > > * x86, got lucky since we didn't use extended fields, > > > fix it so that it will calculate checksum using correct length > > > so that it would be easier to unify arm/x86 into one impl. > > > > > > > I'd say patch 2 should go into this release. > > What about patch 1? It's cosmetic and it isn't the best we can do. > > > > Let me know whether you agree. > I'd say they are both 'cosmetic' as they don't cause guest > failure nor even warning (linux doesn't care (so far) and > we don't have windows for ARM to verify extended checksum). > So we don't have to delay release for both of them. Agreed. > I assumed that Samuel, would include patches in his RSDP > refactoring series and we would merge them as whole later on. That's correct, yes. Cheers, Samuel.