[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Xen PV Device

From: Paul Durrant
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Xen PV Device
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 08:14:00 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> >
> > Like Anthony wrote before, All rights reserved contradicts what's
> > written below.

Like I said, it's part of all BSD licenses that I can find. It's certainly in 
the template on the OSI website and the FreeBSD license for instance.

> > Aside from this, it looks OK to me.
> >
> > I would like to see the libxl side patch.
> > Also it would be nice to have an ack from Andreas or another QOM expert.
> From a QOM view it looks fine now. :) Thanks for inquiring.
> Some other comments though:
> * Now that it no longer depends on TARGET_PAGE_SIZE, is it possible to
> use common-obj-$(CONFIG_XEN)? Then it would build only once rather than
> separately for i386 and x86_64 and any future Xen platforms (e.g., arm).

Sure, that sounds sensible.

> * It looks as if the MMIO functions were renamed - the arguments no
> longer align. That could be edited before you apply the patch to your
> queue if there's nothing else - then feel free to add my Reviewed-by
> independent of the other issue.


> * Paolo had asked for new MemoryRegions not to include the device name -
> can be renamed once they get the owner field though (not merged yet).
> Don't have a better suggestion handy.

I guess this can be fixed up later.

> Also Paul, by my count this is [PATCH v4] - please use
> --subject-prefix="PATCH v5" if you respin and include the change log
> either below "---" or in a cover letter. We prefer to see it for patch
> review but not in Git commit history.

Ok. I was unsure what to do since this device was under a different name so I 
opted to reset the version back to 1. I'll call the next one v5 as you suggest. 
I'm still finding my way with git so thanks for the tips.

> Similarly, "Introduce a new Xen PV device..." would elegantly avoid
> reading "This patch..." after it's been committed. ;)

Sure. Good point.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]