Re: [v6][PATCH 2/2] xen:vtd: missing RMRR mapping while share EPT

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>]

On 2014/9/12 15:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 12.09.14 at 08:38, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 2014/9/3 17:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 03.09.14 at 11:41, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, I want to know if patch v6 is fine to be acked.
>>>>>
>>>>> My position hasn't changed: I view this as correct but incomplete,
>>>>> and hence not ready for inclusion. With - iirc - Tim being of a
>>>>> different opinion, if you want to push for a decision without
>>>>> supplying the missing pieces, see the section "Conflict Resolution"
>>>>> on http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html. But of course
>>>>> I'd much prefer to avoid having to fall back to this, and instead
>>>>> have a complete patch set to commit within reasonable time.
>>>>
>>>> Looks I can't make my RFC patches to implement a complete RMRR
>>>> supporting better as you pointed while reviewing, so I have to go back
>>>> looking at this.
>>>
>>> Please just give me a little time to hand you a replacement patch on
>>> which you could then base the rest of your series. But please also
>>> realize that this isn't my top priority.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>> So how can I issue such a private vote on these two patches? I don't see
>>>> How-to in the section "Conflict Resolution" on
>>>> http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html.
>>>>
>>
>> Jan,
>>
>> I have to admit its really hard to push this RMRR RFC with my
>> experiences and skills. Currently every new revision doesn't minimize
>> all previous comments. Instead, it always brings more comments or
>> arguments. So I don't think myself can do this very well in Xen side.
>>
>> So I still hope we can issue such a vote on these two patches if possible.
>
> Lars, how would we go about this?
>
>> Once I have enough capability to cover this I can go back or other guys
>> may do really better than me.
>
> I already helped you with the first patch. Did you ask the VT-d

Yes, this already costs more our time as you said, and this is also one 
reason why I'm saying myself can't finish this series completely.

Recently looks we have to re-concern this to cover more scenarios, 
hotplug, migration and so forth. I don't think I already have a clear 
design to address everything.

Originally that series is just as RFC. And I believe you already don't 
hope I post too much more incomplete codes to you again.

> maintainers for help with the rest?
>

Ditto.

Thanks
Tiejun