Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] qemu-xen:Correctly expose PCH ISA bridge for IGD passthrough [and 2 more messages]

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 09.05.13 at 15:17, Pasi KÃrkkÃinen<pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Jan: Can you please re-check 2/3 and 3/3 ? 
> 
> "[PATCH 2/3] qemu-xen-trad: Correctly expose PCH ISA bridge for IGD 
> passthrough":
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-02/msg00536.html 

I'm not sure what you're asking for - my comments there weren't
followed up with by the submitter, so I also don't have anything
new to add. I don't think I've seen a cleaned up patch so far.

> "[PATCH 3/3] qemu-xen-trad: IGD passthrough: Expose vendor specific pci cap 
> on 
> host bridge":
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-02/msg00538.html 

Quite similar here, except that Jean was also asked to comment
on why some previously existing code is the way it is, and I don't
think any explanation was ever given.

I can only second what Ian already said - pinging on a patch that
has responses missing from the originator is bad practice. If you
wanted to ping anyone, you'd have to ping those who failed to
answer questions raised to them, not give the appearance of
requesting a patch to be taken that is only half baked.

Jan

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