From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xo9J1-0001c8-SN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:08:20 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xo9Ix-000683-3C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:08:15 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55052) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xo9Iw-00067z-RI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:08:11 -0500 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sABB8AGm010309 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:08:10 -0500 Message-ID: <5461EE16.9030101@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:08:06 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1415636450-18674-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <5460F87C.6050209@redhat.com> <20141110184848.6842474e@nial.usersys.redhat.com> <5460FC4E.6000501@redhat.com> <20141111093520.3f589fe1@nial.usersys.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20141111093520.3f589fe1@nial.usersys.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.2] pc: acpi: mark all possible CPUs as enabled in SRAT List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com On 11/11/2014 09:35, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > > No, I mean can you do it also for pc-2.1 and earlier? Or should it be > > only for the last machine type? > > As Michael sad it's for all machine types or have you meant 2.1 stable > branch? My thought was that it's closed now. I meant pc-2.1. But if you and Michael agree, it's fine to have it there as well. 2.1 stable branch should be open until 2.1.3 is released, shortly after 2.2.0. 2.1.2 was unplanned, so there should be a .3 release like we had 2.1.3. Hmm, http://wiki.qemu.org/index.php?title=Planning/2.1 disagrees. No big deal. Paolo > I've tested it with RHEL6-7x64 and xp3,Windows server 2003-2012R2x64. > So far no regression was noticed.