From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42587) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhMr3-0002CS-6G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2014 13:39:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhMqx-0002Gy-My for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2014 13:39:05 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:43514 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhMqx-0002Gr-GO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2014 13:38:59 -0400 Message-ID: <5367CCB2.7050806@suse.de> Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 19:38:58 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1399301571-6769-1-git-send-email-somlo@cmu.edu> <20140505155138.GA16355@redhat.com> <5367B596.3000700@suse.de> <20140505162150.GC5644@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20140505162150.GC5644@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [v5 PATCH 0/2] apic: bump emulated lapic version to 0x14 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Gabriel L. Somlo" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, Alexander Graf , dslutz@verizon.com, "Michael S. Tsirkin" Am 05.05.2014 18:21, schrieb Gabriel L. Somlo: > Andreas, >=20 > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 06:00:22PM +0200, Andreas F?rber wrote: >> Objection! .compat_props are being added to the current pc and q35 >> machines rather than introducing pc-i440fx-2.1 and pc-q35-2.1 machines >> and adding the compat_props for the 2.0 versions only. >> >> If 2.1 machines without .compat_props get added and the alias is moved >> from 2.0 to 2.1, it'll be fine. >=20 > Patch 1/2 (add compat_props placeholder for 2.0) is written to go in > on top of this patch: >=20 > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-05/msg00476.html >=20 > which is the one adding the 2.1 machine type and moving the alias. >=20 >=20 > The pair of apic patches under discussion here modifies the (by now > legacy) 2.0 machine type. >=20 > Does that clear it up, or am I still misunderstanding something ? Yes, with that patch it's okay, you just forgot to mention that dependency in your cover letter - also a change log from v1 is missing. Instead of quoting Alex in the cover letter, you should've placed his Acked-by before your Signed-off-by in the patches he ack'ed - unless you did major changes there (e.g., uint8_t), in which case it shouldn't be in the cover letter either. And please use [PATCH v5 n/m] as canonical ordering. :) I trust that you have tested and other reviewers have considered no cast to be necessary for left-hand s->version in the expression now that it's uint8_t rather than uint32_t? Then, Reviewed-by: Andreas F=E4rber Cheers, Andreas --=20 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrnbe= rg