From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49896) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fEVim-0005az-3b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2018 04:05:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fEVii-0002AM-8t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2018 04:05:40 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:49870 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fEVii-00029n-1u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2018 04:05:36 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:05:33 +0200 From: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20180504100533.3d0de9e5@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1525176522-200354-5-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1525182297-205763-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 4/5] arm: boot: set boot_info starting from first_cpu List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers On Thu, 3 May 2018 16:03:09 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On 1 May 2018 at 14:44, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > Even though nothing is currently broken (since all boards > > use first_cpu as boot cpu), make sure that boot_info is set > > on all CPUs. > > If some board would like support heterogenuos setup (i.e. > > init boot_info on subset of CPUs) in future, it should add > > a reasonable API to do it, instead of starting assigning > > boot_info from some CPU and till the end of present CPUs > > list. > > It's a bit confusing to only send one patch rather than the > whole set -- our automated patch application and testing > tooling gets confused. I noticed this one by chance because > I was skimming the commit log for v3 and noticed that it was > missing this text. If the change had been in code rather than > in the commit message I would probably not have picked it up... I wanted to not to spam too much list with respin of whole series for commit message fixup, sending fixed up vX as reply is usually ok for x86 trees but it's up to a maintainer preference. Next time for fixups, I'll respin whole series if it's intended to go via ARM tree. > thanks > -- PMM