Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> writes: > On 22/11/12 13:02, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > Thanks for the review, Stefan already applied the patch, though. > Is there anything that you really want to have a followup patch > besides this one?
"Really want" is too strong, but improving the comment on the definition of IF_IDE would be nice. >> There's just one caller that passes IF_DEFAULT. We could change it to >> pass machine->block_default_type instead, and drop parameter >> block_default_type. Follow-up patch. > > I will have a look on that. Thanks!
