From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chen, Tiejun" Subject: Re: Requesting for freeze exception for RMRR Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:27:55 +0800 Message-ID: <55A4D61B.7000403@intel.com> References: <55A35B5E.3000805@intel.com> <55A3DB88020000780009035D@mail.emea.novell.com> <55A45719.3040204@intel.com> <55A4F00D020000780009080D@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55A4F00D020000780009080D@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Kevin , "wei.liu2@citrix.com" , "ian.campbell@citrix.com" , George Dunlap , Andrew Cooper , "ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com" , Yong Y Wang , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>>> Y Y [v7][PATCH 14/16] xen/vtd: enable USB device assignment >>>> Y Y [v7][PATCH 15/16] xen/vtd: prevent from assign the device with >>>> shared rmrr >>> >>> And yet again for these two. Please avoid giving a false impression >> >> But these two patches really won Kevin's Ack, and also I wrote this line >> >> Acked-by: Kevin Tian >> >> both in these two patches. > > But talk here is about their review status, not who ack-ed them (and > an ack by other than a maintainer of the affected code is not very > meaningful anyway). Isn't Kevin the key maintainer specific to IOMMU subsystem? Thanks Tiejun