[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/IOMMU: Switch bool_t to bool
Hi, On 08/08/2023 13:12, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.08.2023 14:06, Andrew Cooper wrote:On 08/08/2023 8:54 am, Jan Beulich wrote:On 07.08.2023 18:58, Andrew Cooper wrote:... as part of cleaning up the types used. Minor style cleanup on some altered lines. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>--- CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx> --- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu.h | 4 ++-- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c | 6 +++--- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c | 6 +++--- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c | 2 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/ats.c | 2 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/ats.h | 2 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c | 4 ++--This will want a DEVICE TREE ack; Cc-ing respective maintainers here (and therefore preserving full context).xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c | 8 ++++---- xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c | 16 ++++++++--------For these and ats.? you would also have wanted to Cc Paul.This very much qualifies as tree-wide.Certainly. Question is what follows from this. In Prague we discussed whether to weaken the required-acks model, and if I'm not mistaken we said we'd first try whether we can't really get chasing acks to work (i.e. for people to respond in a timely fashion, ideally not really requiring any "chasing"). That said, it certainly remains up to you whether to wait of whether to commit. Yet even if already at submission time you know you're not going to wait, I think relevant maintainers should still be Cc-ed. +1. Nowadays, it is also not very difficult to CC the relevant maintainers. scripts/add_maintainers.pl will add all of them automatically for you. Cheers, -- Julien Grall
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |