Ingo Molnar wrote: > general ack for the x86 bits, but i'm not sure whether we should be > pushing this upstream so late in the cycle. If we do it in the next > cycle then it's best we do it in the x86 tree, the KVM impact seems > much smaller than the general x86 impact. > It certainly doesn't fall under the recent regression rule, and there's a simple workaround (rmmod -r kvm) so I agree it's best to defer for the next cycle. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
