From: Dario Faggioli <email@example.com>
To: "Xu, Quan" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <email@example.com>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Keir Fraser <email@example.com>,
Andrew Cooper <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Jan Beulich <email@example.com>, "Wu, Feng" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:39:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1719 bytes --]
On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 02:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote:
> __iiuc__, this patch set is ready for staging branch. if yes, could
> you help me merge it into staging branch?
Well, not yet, AFAICS.
In fact, patch 1 touches xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/ and, unless I've
missed it, I haven't seen Suravee acking it.
> Then, I would send out remaining patch sets on it. otherwise, there
> are some conflicts to it. Thanks.
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).
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
Xen-devel mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-16 8:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-10 14:10 [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu
2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu
2016-03-11 0:24 ` Tian, Kevin
2016-03-11 1:40 ` Xu, Quan
2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu
2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-11 1:38 ` Xu, Quan
2016-03-11 1:33 ` Xu, Quan
2016-03-16 2:39 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Xu, Quan
2016-03-16 8:39 ` Dario Faggioli [this message]
2016-03-16 10:45 ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-17 1:39 ` Xu, Quan
2016-03-17 2:07 ` Dario Faggioli
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).