Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTest Nested v12 03/21] Allow runvars to specify guest disk and ram size (turning previous values into defaults) [and 2 more messages]

["Hu, Robert" <robert.hu@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 6:41 PM
> To: Hu, Robert <robert.hu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx; wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx;
> Jin, Gordon <gordon.jin@xxxxxxxxx>; Zheng, Di <di.zheng@xxxxxxxxx>;
> xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [OSSTest Nested v12 03/21] Allow runvars to specify guest disk
> and ram size (turning previous values into defaults) [and 2 more messages]
> 
> Hu, Robert writes ("RE: [OSSTest Nested v12 03/21] Allow runvars to specify
> guest disk and ram size (turning      previous values into defaults)"):
> > And sorry I haven't got a chance to read your replies/patches until now.
> > So many test tasks almost crushed me.
> 
> That's fine, of course.  We all have other things we are doing.
> 
> > I'm going to read your mails in the coming week.
> 
> Thanks.  I see Ian Campbell has replied to several already.
> 
> 
> Hu, Robert writes ("RE: [OSSTest Nested v12 16/21] Add PDU power method
> for nested L1 and L2 guest"):
> > Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]:
> > > Robert Ho writes ("[OSSTest Nested v12 16/21] Add PDU power method
> for
> > > nested L1 and L2 guest"):
> > > > For nested host/guest, its power on/off method shall be
> > > > its host invoke $(toolstack)->create/destroy method.
> > >
> > > Thanks for this patch, which I have substantially edited for my v14.
> > >
> > > However, I notice that it was missing a signed-off-by.  Can you please
> > > confirm that I should add your s-o-b ?
> >
> > Sorry I forgot to add my s-o-b. Yes, please add mine.
> 
> Of course only one of us ought to be rebasing this series at once,
> because otherwise it will be difficult for us to merge our work.
> 
> In my mail
>   Subject: [OSSTEST PATCH v14 PART 2 10-26/26] Nested HVM testing
>   Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:15:05 +0100
> I handed the series back to you.
> 
> So I think it is you who need to add your own s-o-b to that patch.

Yes I planned to do so.

> 
> (I don't imply any criticism of you with this detailed explanation.  I
> just don't want any misunderstandings; nor do I want this minor work
> item to be dropped.)
> 
> 
> Likewise:
> 
> > > From: Ian Jackson [mailto:ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 3:15 AM
> > > To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: Hu, Robert <robert.hu@xxxxxxxxx>; Ian Campbell
> > > <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Ian
> > > Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: [OSSTEST PATCH 15/26] DhcpWatch::leases: Fix a reporting
> message
> > >
> > > This talks about `guest_check_ip', but this code is now factored out
> > > into a method.  Use the correct method name in reporting.
> ...
> > Ack.
> 
> If you meant
>   Acked-by: Robert Ho <robert.hu@xxxxxxxxx>
> then it would be better if you wrote that explicitly.

Get it.

> 
> And of course as current custodian of the branch, it is up to you to
> record your own ack in it.  This may seem a little odd, but it is the
> standard approach when dealing with a series containing contributions
> from multiple people.

Yes, understand. I'm learning the upstream rules.
> 
> 
> I've read your other emails and Ian's replies and I think you should
> be unblocked now ?  So I'm expecting more questions, bug reports,
> etc., and hopefully eventually a v15.  Do not hesitate to ask again
> for help.

Yeah, I will report issues I found on each specific patch you posted.

> 
> 
> Regards,
> Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel