From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:39:24 +0100 Message-ID: <1458117564.3102.787.camel@citrix.com> References: <1457619007-41460-1-git-send-email-quan.xu@intel.com> <945CA011AD5F084CBEA3E851C0AB28894B864D7E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7917241716448464184==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <945CA011AD5F084CBEA3E851C0AB28894B864D7E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Sender: "Xen-devel" To: "Xu, Quan" , Suravee Suthikulpanit Cc: "Tian, Kevin" , Keir Fraser , Andrew Cooper , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Jan Beulich , "Wu, Feng" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============7917241716448464184== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-t+Q7ilW6QJ7tmjbVAIfe" --=-t+Q7ilW6QJ7tmjbVAIfe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 02:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > Hi, > =C2=A0 __iiuc__, this patch set is ready for staging branch. if yes, coul= d > you help me merge it into staging branch? > Well, not yet, AFAICS. In fact, patch 1 touches=C2=A0xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/ and, unless I've missed it, I haven't seen Suravee acking it. Suravee, ping? > Then, I would send out remaining patch sets on it. otherwise, there > are some conflicts to it. Thanks. >=20 I totally understand, but that should not necessarily hold back you from working on it and posting it. You just do your own development with this patches here applied and then, when posting the series containing (**only***) the remaining patches, you specify _clearly_, in the cover letter, what other series/patches are a prerequisite. That way, people can start reviewing your remaining patches. This is not something that can, IMO, always be done. It highly depends on how the interdependent patch series actually look like. In fact, if either one (or both!) is (are) too big or too complex, it's probably useless (no one would look at the second one anyway) and unfair (it's going to be a lot of work for the reviewer). But in this case, I think it would be just fine. Having a git branch somewhere with the both the series applied would also help a lot, but only if that is possible (and again, in this case, it's probably not too big of a deal anyway). Regards, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-t+Q7ilW6QJ7tmjbVAIfe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEABECAAYFAlbpG7wACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQ+wQCfSMv0+KRVGYFoUJBrATsDdGV9 JlkAniOuFTT+FTsXCEn1sLOeztdMcp3d =h5xT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-t+Q7ilW6QJ7tmjbVAIfe-- --===============7917241716448464184== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVuLm9yZwpodHRwOi8vbGlzdHMueGVuLm9y Zy94ZW4tZGV2ZWwK --===============7917241716448464184==--