Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Dec 2023 16:58:45 +0000 | From | Jonathan Cameron <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] cxl/cdat: Fix header sum value in CDAT checksum |
| |
On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 15:30:14 -0800 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> Ira Weiny wrote: > > Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 17:33:04 -0800 > > > Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231116-fix-cdat-devm-free-v1-1-b148b40707d7@intel.com/ > > > > > > > > Fixes: aba578bdace5 ("hw/cxl/cdat: CXL CDAT Data Object Exchange implementation") > > > > Cc: Huai-Cheng Kuo <hchkuo@avery-design.com.tw> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> > > > > > > This only becomes a problem with the addition of DCDs so I'm not going to rush it in. > > > > That makes sense. > > > > > Btw cc qemu-devel on qemu patches! > > > > > > > Ah... yea my bad. > > Might I also ask for a more prominent way to quickly identify kernel vs > qemu patches, like a "[QEMU PATCH]" prefix? I tend to look for "hw/" in > the diff path names, but the kernel vs qemu question is ambiguous when > looking at the linux-cxl Patchwork queue. I'm not sure if the QEMU maintainers would be that keen on a tag there. Maybe just stick qemu/cxl: in the cover letter naming as a prefix? [PATCH 0/4] qemu/cxl: Whatever the change is
> > @Jonathan, what do you think of having the kernel patchwork-bot watch > your tree for updating patch state (if it is not happening already). My QEMU tree is a bit intermittent and frequently rebased as I'm juggling too many patches. Not sure we'd get a good match. Mind you I've never tried the bot so not even sure how to configure it.
Jonathan
| |