qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

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


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/18] nvme: refactoring and cleanups
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 14:50:11 +0200

Am 11.05.2020 um 09:09 hat Klaus Jensen geschrieben:
> 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

I was waiting for the review Klaus asked for. You had a comment about
renaming patches, but I didn't see any comments about the patches in
question.

> 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.

Ok, I'll wait for that one then. I'm still not sure, though, whether I
should then wait for additional review or just apply the patches.

Kevin




reply via email to

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