Re: [Qemu-devel] [for-4.0 PATCH v3.1 8/9] q35/440fx/arm/spapr/ccw: Add QEMU 4.0 machine type

[Alex Williamson]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 10:52:25 -0200
Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 12:56:21PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:29:25 +0000
> > Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 19:26, Alex Williamson <address@hidden> wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 20:16:44 +0100
> > > > Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > >    
> > > > > I think Conny has already added the s390/ccw part to her next tree.
> > > > > From a quick glimpse both patches look identical.    
> > > >
> > > > If so then we can just use the original v3 version of this patch that
> > > > touches all but ccw and let them come together in mainline.  My
> > > > assumption is that Peter is only trying to make sure all versioned
> > > > machines are updated early in this release, not necessarily that
> > > > they need to be updated together.    
> > > 
> > > Yes, that's the idea. I also think it's a suboptimal idea
> > > to include the version-number-bump patch in a series that's
> > > adding some feature, because then if the feature itself
> > > has to go through several rounds of patch review the
> > > version-number-bump patch is stuck unapplied (we saw that
> > > at the end of the 3.1 cycle), or it gets bumped by some
> > > other unrelated series and then there's a merge conflict.
> > > But that's more of a things-for-next time remark, no need
> > > to rearrange this now.  
> > 
> > If you and the other stakeholders agree, you are more than welcome to
> > pluck this patch from the series and apply it as soon as 4.0 opens.  It
> > might make things a tiny bit easier down the road to avoid the
> > conflicts since we seem to have multiple contenders vying for this
> > update.  Maybe the best practice going forward is to open the merge
> > window with such a commit.  Thanks,  
> 
> I can queue v3 on machine-next and send a pull request as soon as
> v3.1.0 is tagged.  Any objections?

No objection from me, so long as the pull doesn't get delayed.  Please
also collect the Reviewed-by from Eric.  Thanks,

Alex