From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49434) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g0Nb1-0002gv-EL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 05:07:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g0Naw-0008Mc-AS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 05:07:31 -0400 References: <20180910204631.24106-1-mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk> <20180910204631.24106-3-mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk> <20180913002457.GN7978@umbus.fritz.box> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 11:07:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] 40p: add fixed IRQ routing for LSI SCSI device List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Mark Cave-Ayland , David Gibson Cc: famz@redhat.com, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, hpoussin@reactos.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 13/09/2018 06:21, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > Indeed, see the Based-on header attached to the cover letter: it is > dependent upon the lsi53c8xx_create() removal patchset at > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-09/msg00797.html > which Paolo has queued here: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-09/msg01209.html. > > Rather than having to juggle the order of pull requests, would it make > sense for you to take the the lsi53c8xx_create() removal patchset via > ppc-for-3.1 aswell? > No objections from me. Paolo