Re: [Qemu-devel] [for-4.0 PATCH v3.1 8/9] q35/440fx/arm/spapr/ccw: Add QEMU 4.0 machine type

[Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 09:32:21 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 12:56:21 -0700
> Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:29:25 +0000
> > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 19:26, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:    
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 20:16:44 +0100
> > > > Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >      
> > > > > I think Conny has already added the s390/ccw part to her next tree.
> > > > > From a quick glimpse both patches look identical.      
> > > >
> > > > If so then we can just use the original v3 version of this patch that
> > > > touches all but ccw and let them come together in mainline.  My
> > > > assumption is that Peter is only trying to make sure all versioned
> > > > machines are updated early in this release, not necessarily that
> > > > they need to be updated together.      
> > > 
> > > Yes, that's the idea. I also think it's a suboptimal idea
> > > to include the version-number-bump patch in a series that's
> > > adding some feature, because then if the feature itself
> > > has to go through several rounds of patch review the
> > > version-number-bump patch is stuck unapplied (we saw that
> > > at the end of the 3.1 cycle), or it gets bumped by some
> > > other unrelated series and then there's a merge conflict.
> > > But that's more of a things-for-next time remark, no need
> > > to rearrange this now.    
> > 
> > If you and the other stakeholders agree, you are more than welcome to
> > pluck this patch from the series and apply it as soon as 4.0 opens.  It
> > might make things a tiny bit easier down the road to avoid the
> > conflicts since we seem to have multiple contenders vying for this
> > update.  Maybe the best practice going forward is to open the merge
> > window with such a commit.  Thanks,  
> 
> FWIW, I had planned to send a pull request with what is in my queue
> (including the new machine type) first thing after 4.0 opens.
> 
> For the next release: Should we always create a patch like this that
> adds the new type for all machines and queue this as the first thing
> when the tree opens again? (I'd even be willing to do that...) For this
> release, I would prefer to use the already-existing patches instead.

Ok, so we'll stick with the original v3 version that didn't include ccw
and Marc-André's series and this one can fight it out for the rest of
the versioned machines.  Please disregard this v3.1 patch including
ccw.  Thanks,

Alex