From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MuOyG-0007HY-5F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:09:44 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MuOyA-0007Gs-DD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:09:42 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44967 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MuOy9-0007Gg-Ji
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:09:37 -0400
Received: from fe01x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.164]:60119 helo=akado.ru)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1MuOy9-000475-61
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:09:37 -0400
Received: from [10.0.66.9] ([10.0.66.9] verified)
	by fe01-cgp.akado.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13)
	with ESMTP id 115105122 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org;
	Sun, 04 Oct 2009 15:09:33 +0400
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:09:40 +0400 (MSD)
From: malc <av1474@comtv.ru>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/8] musicpal: Catch null TX qeueues
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0910041103580.2194@linmac.oyster.ru>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0910041509040.2646@linmac.oyster.ru>
References: <20090918185122.2879.74216.stgit@mchn012c.ww002.siemens.net>
	<20090918185122.2879.37050.stgit@mchn012c.ww002.siemens.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910041054150.2134@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910041103580.2194@linmac.oyster.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, malc wrote:

> On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, malc wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > 
> > > They likely represent invalid queues that should be skipped. We already
> > > do this for RX queues. Wish I had a spec...
> > > 
> > > Credits go to malc for analyzing the issue and suggesting this fix.
> > > 
> > 
> > What bothers me is:
> > 
> > a. Why 930c86820e8e0b6dfcf211bda5e835463d72ff42 (disregarding dodgy 
>                                                  ^ breaks it
> 
> >    reading into structures directly) and why only on a PPC
> > b. Why the "fix" was not needed before

And FWIW i'm again getting the bounces from web.de (a copy of which i've
sent you the other week)

-- 
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru