From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MGFpr-0005hk-4Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:19:07 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MGFpl-0005eq-Uv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:19:06 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47627 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MGFpl-0005ej-OD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:19:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:46442) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MGFpl-0004iE-7i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:19:01 -0400 Message-ID: <4A368214.6060508@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:17:08 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Register uhci_reset() callback. References: <20090611084808.GA19508@redhat.com> <200906111441.34151.paul@codesourcery.com> <20090611134656.GC19508@redhat.com> <4A3674F5.5080403@redhat.com> <20090615170201.GA3964@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20090615170201.GA3964@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070905070309090302000404" List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Paul Brook , qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070905070309090302000404 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/15/2009 08:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 07:21:09PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 06/11/2009 04:46 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Thursday 11 June 2009, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Update IRQ line on reset. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> This should not be necessary. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> You are always so brief. >>> >> To be fair, so are you. >> >> > May be, but in this case after previous patch to reset interrupt level > for each device at PCI bridge level was rejected on the premise that > device should lower its own irq line on reset and since patches started > flowing in to do just that, I did not expect that eloquent explanation > would be needed for such trivial and obviously correct change. > Citing which guests are unbroken by the patch, for example, would have helped. As someone who accepts a lot of excellent patches from you, I also find the change logs to be laconic. Of course, replies like "this should not be necessary" provide almost zero information and don't improve the situation. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain. --------------070905070309090302000404 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/15/2009 08:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 07:21:09PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:

On 06/11/2009 04:46 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:

On Thursday 11 June 2009, Gleb Natapov wrote:

Update IRQ line on reset.

This should not be necessary.

You are always so brief.

To be fair, so are you.

May be, but in this case after previous patch to reset interrupt level
for each device at PCI bridge level was rejected on the premise that
device should lower its own irq line on reset and since patches started
flowing in to do just that, I did not expect that eloquent explanation
would be needed for such trivial and obviously correct change.

Citing which guests are unbroken by the patch, for example, would have helped. As someone who accepts a lot of excellent patches from you, I also find the change logs to be laconic.

Of course, replies like "this should not be necessary" provide almost zero information and don't improve the situation.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

--------------070905070309090302000404--