On 9/17/19 1:40 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:19:52PM +1000, David Gibson wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 9/16/19 11:52 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>> >>>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Hi David, >>>>> >>>>> On 9/16/19 2:42 AM, David Gibson wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 11:19:34PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>>>>> Quick tests worth to avoid regressions with the 40p machine. >>>>>>> idea from the "Maintainers, please tell us how to boot your machines" >>>>>>> thread: >>>>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-03/msg04177.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> v2: Split Travis job, added Hervé R-b tag >>>>>>> v1: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-06/msg05896.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Phil. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm guessing you're expecting these to go in via the testing tree, in >>>>>> which case >>>>>> >>>>>> Acked-by: David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, appreciated :) >>>>> >>>>>> Or do you want me to take them via the ppc tree? >>>>> >>>>> I think the 'testing tree' should focus on the CI/testing >>>>> infrastructure, while each subsystem maintainers should care about the >>>>> tests covering their subsystem (the testing tree maintainers might not >>>>> have the required knowledge to be sure a test is correctly implemented). >>>>> >>>>> In this particular case I assume you don't have much knowledge of that >>>>> PPC machine, which is a hobbyist one, but since you are the PPC >>>>> maintainer, I'd rather see this going via your tree :) >>>>> >>>>> Alex/Cleber/Eduardo, any comment on this position? >>>> >>>> Once we have a .travis.yml I'm happy with it can go in via another tree >>>> no problem. See other thread.... >>> >>> Good :) >>> >>> David can take patches 1-5 (I tagged patch 6 as RFC but messed something >>> with git-publish and lost it when I sent this series). >> >> Ok, I've taken patches 1-5 into my ppc-for-4.2 tree. > > Hrm. Judging by both the continued comments on this thread, and the > fact it breaks the travis build, seems like this series needs a little > more work. I've pulled it out of ppc-for-4.2 again, and I'll wait for > the next spin.
OK, sorry :|
