On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 16:37:08 +0800 Dong Jia Shi <bjsdj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> [2017-09-05 17:46:06 +0200]: > > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:24:19 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > In the end I don't care that deeply about vfio-ccw, and this problem > > > already took me more time than I intended to spend on this. We have > > > people driving this whole vfio-ccw stuff and I'm not one of them (I'm > > > rather in the supporting role). > > > > > > I'm also fine with me being credited with a reported-by once the > > > more involved people figure out what to do, and keeping the vfio-ccw > > > stuff as is. Should we go with that option? > > > > If converting the reporting to a device status is straightforward > > enough, let's do that. I'm fine with postponing this and waiting for a > > real fix as well (I don't really have spare cycles to actually write > > vfio-ccw code currently...) > > > > I can do this after this series. Cool, thanks!
