On 02/01/15 17:30, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 2 January 2015 at 13:57, Mark Cave-Ayland > <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> wrote: >> On 23/12/14 22:11, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> These patches fix warnings generated by clang. Patches 1-3 >>> have been onlist before (and reviewed by RTH) but didn't get >>> applied I think because of a mixup between me and Mark about >>> which tree they should go in by. 4 and 5 are new. > >> Oh my apologies! Given that there's not much review that I can >> personally do (and they are just compilation fixes) then I was expecting >> these to go either via master or Richard. If that is still a problem let >> me know and I'll queue them as part of my next pull request. > > Where we have a subsystem maintainer I tend to prefer to route > patches via them, on the assumption that they'll do a second > level of testing (even if only of the "yep, still boots" > variety). Also it avoids potential clashes between different > patches to the same target if they all go through your tree. > The idea behind the subsystem-maintainer setup is to spread > the workload a bit :-)
I've finally managed to test these and they don't seem to break anything in my boot tests so I've applied them to my qemu-sparc branch. There is one more SPARC64 NVRAM patch I'd like to get in before sending another pull request, however it depends upon on a related QEMU NVRAM patch series which I'll send through to the list shortly. ATB, Mark.
