"manish.mishra" wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was just checking if it was not missed in holidays and was received. :)
Queued.
Sorry for the delay.
On 31/01/23 8:47 pm, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 08:29:08PM +0530, manish.mishra wrote:
Hi Peter, Daniel,
Just a gentle reminder on this patch if it can be merged, and really
sorry i see now earlier reminders i sent were on v6[0/2] and somehow you
were not CCed on that earlier. Yo
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 08:29:08PM +0530, manish.mishra wrote:
> Hi Peter, Daniel,
>
> Just a gentle reminder on this patch if it can be merged, and really
> sorry i see now earlier reminders i sent were on v6[0/2] and somehow you
> were not CCed on that earlier. You were CCed just on v6[1/2] and
Hi Peter, Daniel,
Just a gentle reminder on this patch if it can be merged, and really sorry i
see now earlier reminders i sent were on v6[0/2] and somehow you were not CCed
on that earlier. You were CCed just on v6[1/2] and v6[2,2] so that's why
probably missed it.
Thanks
Manish Mishra
On
Hi Everyone,
I was just checking if it was not missed in holidays and was received. :)
Thanks
Manish Mishra
On 21/12/22 12:14 am, manish.mishra wrote:
Current logic assumes that channel connections on the destination side are
always established in the same order as the source and the first on
Current logic assumes that channel connections on the destination side are
always established in the same order as the source and the first one will
always be the main channel followed by the multifid or post-copy
preemption channel. This may not be always true, as even if a channel has a
connectio
Current logic assumes that channel connections on the destination side are
always established in the same order as the source and the first one will
always be the main channel followed by the multifid or post-copy
preemption channel. This may not be always true, as even if a channel has a
connectio
