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 78E01C433EF for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:32:59 +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 3656760F24 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:32:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 3656760F24 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.219852.380882 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mhq9y-0000lD-F9; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:50 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 219852.380882; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mhq9y-0000l6-C3; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:50 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 219852; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:49 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mhq9x-0000ku-HF for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:49 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mhq9u-0001eN-UW; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:46 +0000 Received: from [54.239.6.184] (helo=[192.168.7.68]) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mhq9u-0007WS-O6; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:32:46 +0000 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=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID; bh=QFUH8Ot7Lw0F47LxOeZKGrzE5Nfbq0gLhq4KNdoXGhI=; b=CD4G+Q9PWpYX9tPkDn+BU7K0X9 EYgvnNqJsY9KI9J/na3hBssYPTgfFLc8SgkQzb2dfru5Z/t/kEALj0IPeZtSqrOzqQmiNeugvZjKj gwREely2gYTbgw6XcVgZvTaBmHDimnGyHDpIX7tp37HQ71cj/yeWu5kc6ObCn4GeCQ1M=; Message-ID: <61c76ed6-e9f2-f4ec-608c-d84bd0e73258@xen.org> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:32:44 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers [and 2 more messages] To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko , Stefano Stabellini , Ian Jackson Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , Bertrand Marquis , Rahul Singh References: <20211027082533.1406015-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <65886734-7333-4469-fcc1-6916db708f13@xen.org> <6d8f1061-7aec-2c1a-aaf4-c30440c2797a@xen.org> <38da2edd-06a2-63d0-51ad-1284272c8da5@epam.com> <24954.51153.588540.850154@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <0bbe4d1d-421d-e816-42aa-f43581902a02@epam.com> <24953.34635.645112.279110@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <24959.49313.936961.936820@mariner.uk.xensource.com> From: Julien Grall In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Oleksandr, On 02/11/2021 07:16, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > > On 01.11.21 23:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021, Ian Jackson wrote: >>> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers"): >>>> On 28/10/2021 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: >>>>> There are a number of patches that I'm getting CC'd on related to ARM >>>>> and vpci (according to the Subject). Are these targeted for 4.16 ? >>>>> Most of them don't have 4.16 Subject tags. >>>> Oleksandr wants this patch to be included for 4.16 but forgot to tag it >>>> properly. >>> Oh yes. However, >>> >>> 1. I also wrote this: >>> >>>>> I am finding it difficult to see the wood for the trees. >>>>> It would be really helpful if these vpci fixes were collected >>>>> together into a series. >>> Can someone please confirm whether this is the only vpci-related patch >>> that ought to be on my radar for 4.16 ? >>> >>> 2. I have not had a reply to my question on Wednesday in >>> <24953.34635.645112.279110@mariner.uk.xensource.com>: >>> >>> 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 need this information to decide whether a release-ack is >>> appropriate. >>> >>> Note that we are in code freeze so all patches, including bugfixes, >>> need my ack. >> Hi Ian, >> >> This patch [1] is a straightforward 2 lines fix for vpci on ARM. There >> is no risk for the release as the source file affected only builds when >> CONFIG_HAS_VPCI is enabled, and it is currently disabled on ARM. >> >> At the same time, as we know vpci is not complete in 4.16 anyway, so the >> counter argument is that we don't need to fix it. >> >> Given how trivial the fix is, and that it cannot break the build or >> runtime, I would take it. > Thank you, > I can re-send the patch with the updated commit message (Julien), > but I still have no R-b's for the patch, so not sure if it is worth it I can't speak for the others. In my case, I didn't give my reviewed-by because the commit message needs to be updated. If you resend, I will have another look. Cheers, -- Julien Grall