On 20.08.14 13:38, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 08/20/2014 09:20 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> >> On 20.08.14 12:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>> On 07/17/2014 04:30 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>> On 07/15/2014 06:29 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>> Il 14/07/2014 05:17, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto: >>>>>>>> No, you should politely bother them again. >>>>>> >>>>>> That does not seem helping though :-/ >>>>> >>>>> Sorry. :) >>>>> >>>>> Well, patch 1 is the same as v6 and for the others Cornelia and Alex can >>>>> ack it. It looks good to me though. >>>> >>>> >>>> Let me clarify things here. >>>> >>>> Alex rb'ed to 0/4, Cornelia rb'ed 2/4 and 3/4, so I put Alex's rb to >>>> 1&2&3&4&5, Cornelia's rb to 2&3, rebase it on top of the current upstream, >>>> repost after 2.1 is released and resume annoying people again. Is that >>>> correct? >>>> >>>> This is my current set: >>>> 5/5 pc_piix: Migrate to new NMI interface >>>> 4/5 spapr: Add support for new NMI interface >>>> 3/5 s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface >>>> 2/5 s390x: Convert QEMUMachine to MachineClass >>>> 1/5 cpus: Define callback for QEMU "nmi" command >>> >>> >>> Alex, ping. >>> >> >> >> Uh, what exactly do you expect from me? :) > > No idea :) You could take patches to your tree. I do not understand what to > do with this set now. Please help. Thanks.
The way I understood your last email you wanted to rebase and repost them at which point someone could pick them up :) Alex