[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers [and 2 more messages]
On 02.11.21 11:32, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Oleksandr, > > On 02/11/2021 07:16, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> >> >> On 01.11.21 23:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021, Ian Jackson wrote: >>>> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI >>>> MMIO handlers"): >>>>> On 28/10/2021 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: >>>>>> There are a number of patches that I'm getting CC'd on related to ARM >>>>>> and vpci (according to the Subject). Are these targeted for 4.16 ? >>>>>> Most of them don't have 4.16 Subject tags. >>>>> Oleksandr wants this patch to be included for 4.16 but forgot to tag it >>>>> properly. >>>> Oh yes. However, >>>> >>>> 1. I also wrote this: >>>> >>>>>> I am finding it difficult to see the wood for the trees. >>>>>> It would be really helpful if these vpci fixes were collected >>>>>> together into a series. >>>> Can someone please confirm whether this is the only vpci-related patch >>>> that ought to be on my radar for 4.16 ? >>>> >>>> 2. I have not had a reply to my question on Wednesday in >>>> <24953.34635.645112.279110@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>>> >>>> Um, can you explain what the practical impact is of not taking this >>>> patch for 4.16 ? As I understand it vpci for ARM is non-functional in >>>> 4.16 and this is not expected to change ? So there would be no >>>> benefit to users, and taking the patch would add small but nonzero >>>> risk ? >>>> >>>> I need this information to decide whether a release-ack is >>>> appropriate. >>>> >>>> Note that we are in code freeze so all patches, including bugfixes, >>>> need my ack. >>> Hi Ian, >>> >>> This patch [1] is a straightforward 2 lines fix for vpci on ARM. There >>> is no risk for the release as the source file affected only builds when >>> CONFIG_HAS_VPCI is enabled, and it is currently disabled on ARM. >>> >>> At the same time, as we know vpci is not complete in 4.16 anyway, so the >>> counter argument is that we don't need to fix it. >>> >>> Given how trivial the fix is, and that it cannot break the build or >>> runtime, I would take it. >> Thank you, >> I can re-send the patch with the updated commit message (Julien), >> but I still have no R-b's for the patch, so not sure if it is worth it > > I can't speak for the others. In my case, I didn't give my reviewed-by > because the commit message needs to be updated. If you resend, I will have > another look. Sure > > Cheers, > Thanks, Oleksandr
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |