qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] Clean up ISA dependencies so we make ISA op


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] Clean up ISA dependencies so we make ISA optional to build
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:48:31 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

David Gibson <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:56:22AM -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 15:20:29 +0100
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 03:18:20PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>> > > At present, ISA bus support is always included in the build for all
>> > > targets.  However these days there are a number of targets that have
>> > > never had ISA, and even more where many of the individual machines
>> > > don't have ISA.
>> > > 
>> > > Unfortunately there are some awkward dependencies in the core code on
>> > > ISA, although b19c1c0 "isa: remove isa_mem_base variable" did already
>> > > remove one.
>> > > 
>> > > This series engages in some yak shaving to make the necessary
>> > > dependency cleanups, then make inclusion of ISA support optional.
>> > 
>> > For PC/PCI changes
>> > Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > > 
>> > > Given the date, this is obviously aimed at qemu 2.4, not 2.3.
>> > 
>> > Looks like the date for 2.3 is unclear, so it might be
>> > ok to merge.
>> > 
>> > Who's taking this? Luiz? most changes are monitor-related.
>> 
>> I can take them, but the most important question for me is
>> who's reviewing them? I could do it, but not right now.
>
> Any further thoughts on this?  I don't know who would be suitable for
> review, beyond those I've already CCed.

You got a full R-by from Alex and a PC/PCI one from Michael.  Should be
enough.

I just had a look, too, and got questions on PATCH 1's completeness, and
the wisdom of extending the "info pic" / "info irq" crap to more
targets.  Nothing seriously wrong, really.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]