From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] xen/passthrough: extend hypercall to
 support rdm reservation policy
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:27:32 +0100
Message-ID: <1437654452.19412.99.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1437579859-24485-1-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
	<1437579859-24485-4-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
	<21936.54212.592097.157376@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<55B0DAF0.4010706@intel.com>
	<21936.56266.74555.560825@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <21936.56266.74555.560825@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 2015-07-23 at 13:19 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Chen, Tiejun writes ("Re: [PATCH 03/16] xen/passthrough: extend 
> hypercall to support rdm reservation policy"):
> > > Tiejun, please can you send a patch to fix this up.  Please send 
> > > just
> > > a revised version of this patch.  I think the rest of the series 
> > > will
> > > rebase just fine on top of it.  (If I'm wrong then we will need 
> > > to do
> > > something more complex.)
> > 
> > Sorry to this.
> > 
> > 
> >      On ARM side the flag field doesn't take any affect.
> > 
> >      Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
> 
> OK, thanks.  I wasn't sure that just passing 0 was right.
> 
> I will take Jan's and Ian's suggestions as acks for your patch, which
> looks correct to me to implement them.

Can you avoid the mention of DT in the comment please, since PCI will
eventually go that path. Something like "No flags are defined for ARM"
would suffice I think.

Ian.