Re: [Qemu-devel] unreviewed commits (was: Re: Restore consistent formatting)

[malc <av1474@comtv.ru>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2594 bytes --]

On Sun, 6 May 2012, Blue Swirl wrote:

> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:37 AM, malc <av1474@comtv.ru> wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2012, Andreas F?rber wrote:
> >
> >> Am 04.05.2012 02:41, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> >> > On 05/03/2012 02:58 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> >> On 9 February 2012 13:46, Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  wrote:
> >> >>> On 02/09/2012 03:48 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> >>>> You buried the one truly important sentence, let me dig it out for you:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>          *** Patches should always go to the mailing list ***
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Exceptions need justification.  Responsible handling embargoed security
> >> >>>> issues may qualify.  Style fixes certainly not.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 100% agreed.
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't see anything in the mailing list archives corresponding
> >> >> to commits f05ae537, f6af014e.
> >> >>
> >> >> No unreviewed patches should go double when we're in hardfreeze!
> >> >
> >> > These patches are admittedly trivial but it is important to stress the
> >> > point that all patches need to go on the mailing list before being
> >> > committed.
> >> >
> >> > It's an important part of keeping the development process inclusive.  I
> >> > don't think it's reasonable to ask for an Acked-by on something as
> >> > simple as indentation changes but at the same time, there's no reason
> >> > not to just post patches.
> >>
> >> The second patch is far from trivial!
> >>
> >> It unneededly breaks the build on ppc hosts (during the Hard Freeze!),
> >> so that I can no longer compile-test my patch series against PowerKVM.
> >
> > As discussed on IRC, the feature does not work on PPC32, hence it's
> > violently disabled, what's needed is a black/white list of AREG0 ready
> > targets.
> 
> I think disabling was a poor decision, didn't this code already work
> in some cases? What's really needed is to shuffle the registers

It didn't on Linux and BSDs, might have worked on Darwin and AIX.

> according to ABI and this shouldn't be much different to what was
> already in.

The code that was commited was
a. Pathetically inneficient everywhere
b. Wrong for SysV ABI

> 
> I have sent out AREG0 patches for ARM and PPC, also I have x86 patches
> in preparation. When (if) these and maybe further conversions are
> committed for 1.2, PPC host support will be practically nonexistent.
> Is this what you want?

What i do not want is code that doesn't work. And i take non-existant
over wrong any day. I also would prefer to be notified when code which
i maintain is modified.

[..snip..]

-- 
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru