On 5/6/21 9:55 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote: > On 5/5/21 9:31 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 02:15:29PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 5/5/21 12:04 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>> Claudio Fontana <cfont...@suse.de> writes: >>>>> On 3/8/21 3:02 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>>>> Claudio Fontana <cfont...@suse.de> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> anything else for me to do here? >>>>>> >>>>>> It looks to me that this series is looking pretty good. Every patch has >>>>>> at least one review so I think it's just waiting on the maintainers to >>>>>> pick it up. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paolo/Richard - are you intending to take the series as is or are you >>>>>> waiting for something else? I'd like to see the patch delta reduced for >>>>>> the ARM cleanup work which is still ongoing. >>>>> >>>>> I am a bit at a loss here, as this has been reviewed for a while, but >>>>> nothing is happening. >>>>> Rebasing is starting to become more and more draining; >>>> >>>> This is still the latest re-factor right? >>>> >>>> Subject: [PATCH v28 00/23] i386 cleanup PART 2 >>>> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 14:27:36 +0100 >>>> Message-Id: <20210322132800.7470-1-cfont...@suse.de> >>>> >>>>> I am seeing some changes from Phil that redo some of the patches here >>>>> (like target arch user), >>>>> maybe you would like to drive this? >>>> >>>> AIUI his changes where to get qtest passing. >>> >>> I hadn't read Claudio's mail, I think he's mentioning commit 46369b50ee3 >>> >>> meson: Introduce meson_user_arch source set for arch-specific user-mode >>> >>> Similarly to the 'target_softmmu_arch' source set which allows >>> to restrict target-specific sources to system emulation, add >>> the equivalent 'target_user_arch' set for user emulation. >>> >>> The patch only contains 6 lines in 2 hunks, if it introduced a conflict >>> it should be trivial to resolve (I wasn't expecting it to conflict with >>> your work when I merged it TBH).
> I'd suggest to move the discussions about the ARM series to the arm series > thread. > > I am concerned here about the groundwork and x86 part. OK sorry, I was explaining the IRC chat. Is there any issue rebasing the groundwork on top of commit 46369b50ee3? Maybe my qtest/accel series is irrelevant to your x86 part, TBH I don't remember. Regards, Phil.
