From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37793 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQMHQ-0006ih-Fb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:50:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <daahern@cisco.com>) id 1PQMHO-00070P-PU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:50:08 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71]:12972)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <daahern@cisco.com>) id 1PQMHO-0006pq-L7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:50:06 -0500
Message-ID: <4CFFA904.7030508@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 08:49:24 -0700
From: "David S. Ahern" <daahern@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] State of EHCI emulation for QEMU
References: <4CDEE6C5.3010808@web.de> <4CF988EC.6010004@redhat.com>
	<4CFA0462.8080407@web.de> <4CFAA2D9.3010106@cisco.com>
	<4CFF4142.2090603@redhat.com> <4CFF4280.30702@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <4CFF4280.30702@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>



On 12/08/10 01:32, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Am 08.12.2010 09:26, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>   Hi,
>>
>>> It appears that the import of the ehci code to spice has completely lost
>>> the development history and code contributions - from the original
>>> version by Mark Burkley through the work I've done on it. Would you mind
>>> pulling in the patch history instead of just the final code?
>>
>> I've first tried to rebase the ehci branch to latest master exactly to
>> keep the history.  Was quite messy with lots of conflicts though, so I
>> gave up.  For review & upstream merge having the whole history isn't
>> that helpful anyway.

Where was the messiness given that most of the changes are to a brand
new file? The biggest change after that is to usb-linux to handle large
requests.

David


> 
> I'm was regularly merging master into ehci, and that worked quite well.
> For the development phase, it might be nice to keep the history if
> possible. But I agree that we need a clean series once upstream
> submission is in sight.
> 
> Jan
>