Re: [Xen-devel] AMD/IOMMU: revert "SR56x0 Erratum 64 - Reset all head & tail pointers"

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/04/2013 10:30 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 04/06/13 10:24, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Andrew Cooper
> > <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 03/06/13 08:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > The code this patch added is redundant with already present code in
> > > > set_iommu_{command_buffer,{event,ppr}_log}_control(). Just switch those
> > > > ones from using writel() to writeq() for consistency.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Yikes - I clearly didn't do a good job looking to see whether this issue
> > > had already been addressed.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > You couldn't make this an "Acked-by", could you?
> >
> >   -George
> I could do that, but as I am not a maintainer, I was under the
> impression that reviewed-by was my preferred way of saying "I think this
> is sensible".
In this context, I would read "Acked-by" as "I agree that this should go 
in", or at very least, "I am happy for this to go in"; whereas to me 
"Reviewed-by" to me sounds like, "I took a close look at the code and 
didn't see anything wrong, but otherwise have no opinion on the matter."
But maybe I'm behind the times here. :-)

 -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel