On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 18:57 -0500, David Miller wrote:

From: Zoltan Kiss <redacted>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:37:50 +0000

quoted

Maybe you mixed up mine with that? But that's also not eligible to be
applied yet.

I can always revert the series if there are major objections.

Zoltan -- does this patch series suffer from/expose the confusion
regarding RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS which we are discussing
separately on xen-devel? If the answer is yes then I think this series
should be reverted for the time being because there seems to be some
fairly fundamental questions about the semantics of that macro.

If the answer is no then I will endeavour to review this version of the
series ASAP (hopefully tomorrow) and determine if I have any other major
objections which would warrant a revert.

Ian.