From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C8BC433EF for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF1316109F for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:08:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org AF1316109F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=xenproject.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.217142.377006 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmP0-0006TU-0V; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:50 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 217142.377006; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmOz-0006TN-Tl; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:49 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 217142; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:48 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmOy-0006ST-K2 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:48 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmOy-0000E5-J5 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:48 +0000 Received: from iwj (helo=mariner.uk.xensource.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmOy-0000Uc-IG for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:07:48 +0000 Received: from iwj by mariner.uk.xensource.com with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1mfmOj-0007zu-Rh; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 18:07:33 +0100 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xenproject.org; s=20200302mail; h=References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:Date :Message-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:From; bh=PAlChERQT9Splk172v3rgtHgay6giGcKCHV4DS1ABJ8=; b=36cZ3uepc1sjCeWx+WaTmUsJf3 FSdfT3rmnCNJ8Si5K+LaFF03iIznMv3zAmHlYybzxHI0450QAV3xIAx0CaNRH5aDzSOCYTRxMqAZA fcRFaMWa8wZf63fjlCKHBmuKbJiFHbTqXwMHh3MAb2tL2xPTFGbbkeOnUSgwKc/qST0w=; From: Ian Jackson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <24953.34635.645112.279110@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 18:07:23 +0100 To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko Cc: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= , "xen-devel\@lists.xenproject.org" , "julien\@xen.org" , "sstabellini\@kernel.org" , Bertrand Marquis , Rahul Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers In-Reply-To: <0bbe4d1d-421d-e816-42aa-f43581902a02@epam.com> References: <20211027082533.1406015-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <0bbe4d1d-421d-e816-42aa-f43581902a02@epam.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.5.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Oleksandr Andrushchenko writes ("Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers"): > P.S. Sorry I failed to mark this patch as a fix for 4.16 and explain why it is > a good candidate for 4.16 inclusion Hello :-). Um, can you explain what the practical impact is of not taking this patch for 4.16 ? As I understand it vpci for ARM is non-functional in 4.16 and this is not expected to change ? So there would be no benefit to users, and taking the patch would add small but nonzero risk ? I think according to the freeze policy I set this can go in if the maintainers feel it is a "straightforward bugfix", but provided it goes in by the end of this coming Friday. After that it will need a release-ack and right now, unless I am mistaken (which may well be the case) it can just as well wait ? Thanks, Ian.