qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] Bitmap based CPU enumeration


From: Peter Crosthwaite
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] Bitmap based CPU enumeration
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 01:39:58 -0700

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 04/06/2015 07:44, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Bharata B Rao
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 09:59:38PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Bharata B Rao
>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> All the comments have been addressed and the series has been reviewed
>>>>> by David, Eduardo and Igor. Can this series be taken in now ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andreas' comment on P3 looks unaddressed. I think it can be handled by
>>>> just putting that one sentance explanation you gave in commit message,
>>>> or if its far enough out of scope just drop the change.
>>>>
>>>> I think Igor's comment was an out of scope suggestion in the end so
>>>> nothing needed there?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I am not the maintainer but I need to rebase on you for one of my
>>>> patch sets so I'd like to help see this though!
>>>
>>> Should I be rebasing against latest master or anyone else's tree to make
>>> it easier for inclusion ?
>>>
>>
>> I don't know about anyone elses tree, but there is an edit to last
>> patch so a fresh complete v4 rebased is probably going to make life
>> easy for whoever.
>>
>> I have CCd Paolo who owns exec.c according to MAINTAINERS.
>
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
>
> I wouldn't mind separating the "CPU" parts of exec.c and moving them
> under Andreas and Eduardo's mantainership.  In fact, Peter, in your
> patch to move stuff from cpu-exec.c to cpus.c, perhaps you can use
> qom/cpu.c instead?  Then qom/cpu.c can also be the place where we can
> move the CPU parts of exec.c.
>

So that relocated code uses conditional compile based on
CONFIG_SOFTMMU. Is that def accessible from common-obj-y code which
qom/cpu.c is?

My choice of cpus.c was based on the fact that it was obj-y.

I assume this is all follow up work out of scope of Bharata's code. Do
you have a queue I can rebase my conflicting ENV_GET_CPU work on?

Regards,
Peter

> Paolo
>



reply via email to

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