27.05.2013 05:40, li guang wrote: [] >>> NACK. If you want to apply 1-3, okay. But please unqueue 4/4, it makes >>> no sense as-is (just look at the stderr output to see what I mean) and >>> it pretends that I suggested that! >> >> Actually I did just that, rebuild with DEBUG_DEBUGCON and looked >> at the output, -- because I didn't know how it works. And you're >> right, it's not a good change ;) But your email come before I was >> able to reply. Unqueued. > > Hi, Michael
Hello. Please excuse me for the long(ish) delay, I was out of the city when you sent this email and when you pinged me on IRC. > do you queued patch 1-3? > if so, I will only send one patch for comments from Andreas, > otherwise, I will refactor all patches. Yes I queued your patches 1-3 but not 4. It can be seen at http://git.corpit.ru/?p=qemu.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/trivial-patches-next (I just rebased it again on top of current qemu/master, but your 3 patches are there). Should I replace these 3 with the next set? But as Gerd correctly say, maybe it's better to just get rid of these stuff completely, or maybe, just maybe, replace it with tracepoints. Anyway, I think the 3 queued-up patches are okay. Thanks, /mjt