From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39567) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0QD9-0000am-NQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2015 04:09:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0QD6-00022Q-9x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2015 04:09:11 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]:32926) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0QD6-00022H-2n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2015 04:09:08 -0400 Received: by wiwd19 with SMTP id d19so12922640wiw.0 for ; Thu, 04 Jun 2015 01:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <557007A0.9010204@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:09:04 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1432184528-31252-1-git-send-email-bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150529022715.GB597@in.ibm.com> <20150604030854.GA32292@in.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] Bitmap based CPU enumeration List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Crosthwaite , Bharata B Rao Cc: zhugh.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, Eduardo Habkost , Alexander Graf , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Igor Mammedov , =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= , David Gibson On 04/06/2015 07:44, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Bharata B Rao > wrote: >> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 09:59:38PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: >>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Bharata B Rao >>> wrote: >>>> All the comments have been addressed and the series has been reviewed >>>> by David, Eduardo and Igor. Can this series be taken in now ? >>>> >>> >>> Andreas' comment on P3 looks unaddressed. I think it can be handled by >>> just putting that one sentance explanation you gave in commit message, >>> or if its far enough out of scope just drop the change. >>> >>> I think Igor's comment was an out of scope suggestion in the end so >>> nothing needed there? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Peter >>> >>> P.S. I am not the maintainer but I need to rebase on you for one of my >>> patch sets so I'd like to help see this though! >> >> Should I be rebasing against latest master or anyone else's tree to make >> it easier for inclusion ? >> > > I don't know about anyone elses tree, but there is an edit to last > patch so a fresh complete v4 rebased is probably going to make life > easy for whoever. > > I have CCd Paolo who owns exec.c according to MAINTAINERS. Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini I wouldn't mind separating the "CPU" parts of exec.c and moving them under Andreas and Eduardo's mantainership. In fact, Peter, in your patch to move stuff from cpu-exec.c to cpus.c, perhaps you can use qom/cpu.c instead? Then qom/cpu.c can also be the place where we can move the CPU parts of exec.c. Paolo