From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39860) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gUwRi-00006r-El for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 11:24:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gUwRe-0007Xa-Lm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 11:24:14 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50704) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gUwRa-0007L9-Qu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 11:24:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:24:01 -0700 From: Alex Williamson Message-ID: <20181206092401.09e6ed37@x1.home> In-Reply-To: <20181206125225.GW18284@habkost.net> References: <154394083644.28192.8501647946108201466.stgit@gimli.home> <154394987445.795.4102526920089904508.stgit@gimli.home> <6bc68937-ec9e-d28f-9468-5ee9ba08ef52@de.ibm.com> <20181204122647.3a560066@x1.home> <20181204125621.0ad30dc0@x1.home> <20181206125225.GW18284@habkost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [for-4.0 PATCH v3.1 8/9] q35/440fx/arm/spapr/ccw: Add QEMU 4.0 machine type List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: Peter Maydell , Cornelia Huck , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , David Hildenbrand , QEMU Developers , Christian Borntraeger , =?UTF-8?B?TWFyYy1BbmRy?= =?UTF-8?B?w6k=?= Lureau , Paolo Bonzini , David Gibson , Richard Henderson On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 10:52:25 -0200 Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 12:56:21PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:29:25 +0000 > > Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 19:26, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 20:16:44 +0100 > > > > Christian Borntraeger 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, > > I can queue v3 on machine-next and send a pull request as soon as > v3.1.0 is tagged. Any objections? No objection from me, so long as the pull doesn't get delayed. Please also collect the Reviewed-by from Eric. Thanks, Alex