On 4 December 2017 at 10:16, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 3 December 2017 at 04:56, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 06:05:25PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> Are any of these so important that we would absolutely refuse >>> to release without the fixes (ie they justify rolling an rc4 >>> that we would otherwise not have needed) ? > >> The msi one is less important it just happened to be queued a while ago >> and I didn't want to rebase all testing. Others are crashers but they >> don't affect everyone. So I wouldn't be sure, but there's also a >> security fix in there, so yes, I suspect we are better off with rc4, and >> if we do I think including others is justified (except maybe the msi >> one, if you feel strongly I'll rebase and drop it). > > The bar has to be set quite high here, because if it turns out > that there are problems with a bug fix then we are out of time > to rework or revert it. And the more fixes we throw in at the > last minute, even if they're individually simple, the more > likely that one of them turns out to have unexpected consequences. > > So: were any of these bugs present in the 2.10 release? If so, > that strongly argues for not trying to fix them at this point. > > With all of these patches plus David Gibson's, that would be > 10 new patches in rc4. That is definitely more than would be > ideal.
After some discussion on IRC we decided that these should go in. Thanks for the further information; pull applied to master. -- PMM
