Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] add CCW indirect data access support

[Halil Pasic]

On 09/08/2017 12:49 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 12:45:25 +0200
> Halil Pasic <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> The discussion seems to have settled down quite a bit. Since there weren't
>> many complaints, I would like to opt for a v2 fixing the things pointed out
>> during the review early next week (I was thinking Tuesday maybe some late 
>> birds
>> are going to join in).
>>
>> @Connie 
>> ========
>>
>> Does that sound reasonable or would you like more time for v1?
> 
> No, sounds good.
> 

Nod.

>>
>> What do you think, would it make more sense to omit or to keep the testing
>> stuff for v2 (I mean patch 5 and the kernel module in the cover letter)?
> 
> Can you maybe split this out? It makes it easier if you don't have to
> go hunt in a cover letter.
> 

I'm not sure, I know what you mean. Adding an out-of-tree linux kernel module to
the qemu tree does not sound right, so I suppose I should not send it as a 
patch.

Splitting out the test device patch (#5) does not sound like a good idea either,
because it depends on patches #1 and #4.

TL;DR Yes, I would be glad to if you tell me how.

>>
>> You probably haven't found the time to look at have a glance at "s390x/css: 
>> drop
>> data-check in interpretation" 
>> (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_patch_810995_&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=afpWhmOLStQASenyglRLvnb_ajvdRfgp4RlDrLw42F4&m=hshoLebtV7YUijl44CLPl5gP9F1HrXyCbL85tQhvA1w&s=SjTjqdOybbUj1pGpODNHdUfXBZBZU-iav6j10EEWYfQ&e=
>>  ). We
>> have said it would make some things more straight forward here, and I could
>> drop that ugly TODO comment. I think it's quite straight-forward, and I would
>> not mind having a decision on it before v2 or putting it as preparation into
>> v2. What do you prefer?
> 
> It is marked for my attention. I don't know whether I find time to look
> at it today, but probably early next week.
> 

OK. Btw, I have a couple of other bug-fixes in the pipe. I think I will just
send out a v1 series to get the discussion started (and for now ignore possible
merge  conflicts with my patches already on the list).

Regards,
Halil