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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 045C0C49ED7 for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 14:16:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5BCD214D9 for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 14:16:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388539AbfIPOQP (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:16:15 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:39366 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727989AbfIPOQO (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:16:14 -0400 Received: from [5.158.153.52] (helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1i9rnX-0008P1-Su; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:16:12 +0200 Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:16:11 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Alex Williamson cc: Ben Luo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tao.ma@linux.alibaba.com, gerry@linux.alibaba.com, nanhai.zou@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] genirq/vfio: Introduce irq_update_devid() and optimize VFIO irq ops In-Reply-To: <20190913114452.5e05d8c4@x1.home> Message-ID: References: <20190913114452.5e05d8c4@x1.home> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 13 Sep 2019, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 14:30:16 +0800 > Ben Luo wrote: > > > A friendly reminder. > > The vfio patch looks ok to me. Thomas, do you have further comments or > a preference on how to merge these? I'd tend to prefer the vfio > changes through my branch for testing and can pull the irq changes with > your approval, but we could do the reverse or split them and I could > follow with the vfio change once the irq changes are in mainline. I can provide you a branch, once I looked again at that stuff. It's somewhere in that huge conference induced backlog. Thanks, tglx