"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 11:21:26AM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote: >> >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 10:23:15AM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote: >> >> >> >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> >> >> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:23:04AM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote: >> >> >> The previous fix to virtio_device_started revealed a problem in its >> >> >> use by both the core and the device code. The core code should be able >> >> >> to handle the device "starting" while the VM isn't running to handle >> >> >> the restoration of migration state. To solve this dual use introduce a >> >> >> new helper for use by the vhost-user backends who all use it to feed a >> >> >> should_start variable. >> >> >> >> >> >> We can also pick up a change vhost_user_blk_set_status while we are at >> >> >> it which follows the same pattern. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fixes: 9f6bcfd99f (hw/virtio: move vm_running check to >> >> >> virtio_device_started) >> >> >> Fixes: 27ba7b027f (hw/virtio: add boilerplate for vhost-user-gpio >> >> >> device) >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> >> >> >> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> >> >> > >> >> > why is this in this patchset? >> >> >> >> As per my cover letter: >> >> >> >> Most of these patches have been posted before as single patch RFCs. A >> >> couple are already scheduled through other trees so will drop out in >> >> due course >> >> >> >> but I keep them in my tree until they are merged so I can continue to >> >> soak test them (and have a stable base for my other WIP trees). >> > >> > That's fine just pls don't double-post them on list, certainly >> > not as part of a patchset. >> >> Why not? Is this breaking some tooling? > > Yes patchset breaks git am if you try to apply part of it. > > Reposting creates work for reviewers - why should they have to read the same > patch twice? In this case it also made me scratch my head trying to > figure out what to do about it. > > But, if you are careful and maintain an ordered changelog after "---" > and there it says > changes since rfc: > no changes, subject changed > > then this second part is less of a problem Ahh yes, I should have updated to point out I added the extra Fixes line as per the review. I guess you added that in your PR? Anyway it's dropped now your PR has gone in. -- Alex Bennée
