From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59935) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YSqh0-0005mj-Qh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2015 12:33:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YSqgx-00085r-Uq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2015 12:33:14 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YSqgx-00085i-NM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2015 12:33:11 -0500 Message-ID: <54F5F04C.2060205@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 12:33:00 -0500 From: Max Reitz MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1425061147-1411-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <54F5EF8F.7000802@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <54F5EF8F.7000802@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 00/69] Block patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christian Borntraeger , Peter Maydell , Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: qemu-devel , Stefan Hajnoczi On 2015-03-03 at 12:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Am 03.03.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Peter Maydell: >> On 28 February 2015 at 03:57, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >>>> Ekaterina Tumanova (5): >>>> block: add bdrv functions for geometry and blocksize >>>> raw-posix: Factor block size detection out of raw_probe_alignment() >>>> block: Add driver methods to probe blocksizes and geometry >>>> block-backend: Add wrappers for blocksizes and geometry probing >>>> BlockConf: Call backend functions to detect geometry and blocksizes >>> Max Reitz found an issue with this patch. >>> >>> Peter: Please squash the following trivial fix into "BlockConf: Call >>> backend functions to detect geometry and blocksizes": >>> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-02/msg05512.html >> I can't squash fixes into pull requests -- I can only >> apply them, or not apply them. You need to respin. >> >>> I want to avoid spamming the list with another 60 patches. >> If it's a trivial change since last time around you can just >> send the cover letter to the list with a note in it that there >> have only been small changes. >> >> -- PMM >> > I think you could just apply this pull request and add the fixup as separate > patch. > After all it fixes a case were the command line is wrong, so should not > on the critical path - I guess. I agree. It's not nice to have a known break, but we're a bit behind on the pull requests already... Also, the segfault is always caused by dereferencing a null pointer, so there is no security issue. Max