| Message ID | cover.1394135904.git.amit.shah@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Juan, > > Here's a compilation of migration-related patches from the list that > I've reviewed. > > For the first patch, I picked Markus's over yours, just because it's > been on the list longer. > > > The following changes since commit 9fbee91a131a05e443d7108d7fbdf3ca91020290: > > Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/kvm/uq/master' into staging (2014-02-27 16:00:31 +0000) > > are available in the git repository at: > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/qemu/amit/migration.git for-quintela > > for you to fetch changes up to 6bb5d0981b1331df2150ae48ed9fabafea33d1d2: > > migration: add more traces (2014-03-07 01:23:50 +0530) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Alexey Kardashevskiy (3): > vl: add system_wakeup_request tracepoint > migration: extend section_start/end traces > migration: add more traces > > Markus Armbruster (1): > qemu_file: Fix mismerge of "use fwrite() correctly" > > migration.c | 30 ++++++------------------------ > qemu-file.c | 4 +++- > savevm.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------ > trace-events | 21 +++++++++++++++++++-- > vl.c | 2 ++ > vmstate.c | 2 ++ > 6 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
On 6 March 2014 20:03, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Juan, > > Here's a compilation of migration-related patches from the list that > I've reviewed. > > For the first patch, I picked Markus's over yours, just because it's > been on the list longer. > > > The following changes since commit 9fbee91a131a05e443d7108d7fbdf3ca91020290: > > Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/kvm/uq/master' into staging (2014-02-27 16:00:31 +0000) > > are available in the git repository at: > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/qemu/amit/migration.git for-quintela Just for clarity: I'm assuming from the salutation and the branch name that you're expecting Juan to merge these into his tree; I'm not going to apply them to master. thanks -- PMM
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > On 6 March 2014 20:03, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hi Juan, >> >> Here's a compilation of migration-related patches from the list that >> I've reviewed. >> >> For the first patch, I picked Markus's over yours, just because it's >> been on the list longer. >> >> >> The following changes since commit 9fbee91a131a05e443d7108d7fbdf3ca91020290: >> >> Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/kvm/uq/master' into staging >> (2014-02-27 16:00:31 +0000) >> >> are available in the git repository at: >> >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/qemu/amit/migration.git for-quintela > > Just for clarity: I'm assuming from the salutation and the branch name > that you're expecting Juan to merge these into his tree; I'm not > going to apply them to master. They are already on my last pull request. Thanks to both, JUan.
Hi Peter, On (Sat) 08 Mar 2014 [12:19:10], Peter Maydell wrote: > On 6 March 2014 20:03, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi Juan, > > > > Here's a compilation of migration-related patches from the list that > > I've reviewed. > > > > For the first patch, I picked Markus's over yours, just because it's > > been on the list longer. > > > > > > The following changes since commit 9fbee91a131a05e443d7108d7fbdf3ca91020290: > > > > Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/kvm/uq/master' into staging (2014-02-27 16:00:31 +0000) > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/qemu/amit/migration.git for-quintela > > Just for clarity: I'm assuming from the salutation and the branch name > that you're expecting Juan to merge these into his tree; I'm not > going to apply them to master. Yes, indeed, that was the case for this pull request. I intend to review a few migration patches on the list and send them on to Juan for review and later merging. If they're trivial, I'll pass them on to you directly. Should I mark the subject line as [migration PULL], so you don't have to bother with the pull req? Something else? Amit
On 10 March 2014 04:39, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote: > Should I mark the subject line as [migration PULL], so you don't have > to bother with the pull req? Something else? That seems a reasonable convention, yes, or [PULL migration] maybe. thanks -- PMM