On Feb 8 17:19, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Keith,
>
> On 2/8/21 4:54 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 10:20:51AM +0100, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> >> On Feb 8 10:03, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> >>> Hi Dmitry, Klaus.
> >>>
> >>> On 2/8/21 1:32 AM, Dmitry Fomichev wrote:
> >>>> Implicitly and Explicitly Open zones can be closed by Close Zone
> >>>> management function. This got broken by a recent commit and now such
> >>>> commands fail with Invalid Zone State Transition status.
> >>>>
> >>>> Modify nvm_zrm_close() function to make Close Zone work correctly.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Fomichev <dmitry.fomic...@wdc.com>
> >>>> Fixes: 053b5a302c3("hw/block/nvme: refactor zone resource management")
> >>>
> >>> '053b5a302c3': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.
> >>>
> >>> If you point at an unmerged commit, why not fix it directly
> >>> before merging?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Dmitry, you OK with me squashing this fix and appending
> >>
> >> [dmitry: fix broken Close Zone]
> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Fomichev <dmitry.fomic...@wdc.com>
> >>
> >> to the commit message?
> >
> > IMO, we should avoid the habit of rebasing and force pushes on staging
> > trees once they're public.
>
> Well I had not information this patch was targeting another tree.
>
> If you don't want to send regular pull request, it would be useful
> to ask the NVMe contributors to provide an information on which
> tree their patch is based.
>
I'm just behind on sending a that pull request. I'll do that :)
