From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MPGKH-0004Ln-TW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:39:45 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MPGKC-0004Ex-Vp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:39:45 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41117 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MPGKC-0004EZ-QB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:39:40 -0400 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.141]:46571) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MPGKC-0005Ot-Dz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:39:40 -0400 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n6ADYgTf027390 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:34:42 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n6ADddAF182640 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:39:39 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6ADb8Sj004482 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:37:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4A574499.3010907@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:39:37 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu-iotests: make a few more tests generic References: <20090708194143.GA14640@lst.de> <4A55BF62.9070702@redhat.com> <20090709132513.GA13722@lst.de> <4A56F22A.8030406@redhat.com> <4A573908.5020600@us.ibm.com> <20090710133431.GA17096@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20090710133431.GA17096@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> It's also up to the submitter to keep track of their patches. If they >> think one should be applied that hasn't been, they need to follow up on it. >> The only way to scale here is to push as much work as possible to the >> outer-most nodes. >> > > It's just really hard to track stuff without feedback. You only flush > your queue very sproadicly, so some kind of indicator that it is in the > queue would be extremly helpful. Just an ok, I'll queue it to mean that > it's not lost means we know it's been deal with in some way, and we can > ping patches that haven't gotten any feedback for say a week. > What about akpm-style automated notifications that a patch has been queued and/or rejected from queue? These would just go to the sender, not the list. It wouldn't be very hard for me to add this. And yeah, more frequent queue flushing is a separate problem. -- Regards, Anthony Liguori