Re: [PATCH v5 00/18] nvme: refactoring and cleanups

[Klaus Jensen]

On May 11 09:00, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Klaus,
> 
> On 5/11/20 8:25 AM, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > On May  5 07:48, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > > From: Klaus Jensen <address@hidden>
> > > 
> > > Changes since v5
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > No functional changes, just updated Reviewed-by tags. Also, I screwed up
> > > the CC list when sending v4.
> > > 
> > > Philippe and Keith, please add a Reviewed-by to
> > > 
> > >    * "nvme: factor out pmr setup" and
> > >    * "do cmb/pmr init as part of pci init"
> > > 
> > > since the first one was added and the second one was changed in v4 when
> > > rebasing on Kevins block-next tree which had the PMR work that was not
> > > in master at the time.
> > > 
> > > With those in place, it should be ready for Kevin to merge.
> > > 
> > Gentle ping on this.
> > 
> > Also, please see the two patches in "[PATCH 0/2] hw/block/nvme: fixes
> > for interrupt behavior". I think they should go in preparation to this
> > series.
> 
> I was going to ping Kevin last week, but then read your comment on pach #7
> "nvme: add max_ioqpairs device parameter", so I interpreted you would
> respin.
> Now it is clearer, applying in the following order you don't need to respin,
> right?
> 
> - [PATCH 0/2] hw/block/nvme: fixes for interrupt behavior"
> - [PATCH v5 00/18] nvme: refactoring and cleanups
> 

Ugh. "[PATCH v5 00/18] nvme: refactoring and cleanups" doesn't apply
completely cleanly.

"[PATCH 0/2] hw/block/nvme: fixes for interrupt behavior" was intented
to go into master because it fixes a bug, that is why I split them up.

But looks like it is better to just roll it into this series. I'll
respin a v6 with the two interrupt fixes.