Hi Peter.
I tried rebasing Catalin's tree on kvm.next, and wasn't sure (+didn't
have time) to fix all the conflicts properly. Are any of you willing
to do that, then I'll be happy to rebase my KVM stuff on top of that
and fix the header files...?
-Christoffer
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Christoffer Dall
<c.dall at virtualopensystems.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>>
>> On 16.02.2012, at 19:12, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 February 2012 18:12, Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16.02.2012, at 19:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16 February 2012 18:07, Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>>>>>> On 16.02.2012, at 19:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>>>>> Does anybody have a matching version of the arm kvm.h that I can pull
>>>>>>> into the qemu-linaro tree so we're back in sync again?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It looks like it might be as simple as adding a
>>>>>>> ?/* definition of registers in kvm_run */
>>>>>>> ?struct kvm_sync_regs {
>>>>>>> ?};
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and that certainly compiles, but I thought it better to check...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a script in scripts/ for syncing the kernel headers. Just run that against your current ARM development kvm tree and you should be good, no?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, because the current ARM development KVM tree isn't
>>>>> based on kvm.next (it doesn't have kvm_sync_regs) and I don't
>>>>> want to effectively revert your commit :-)
>>>>
>>>> Yikes. Rebase it then?
>>>
>>> This is effectively what I'm asking for, yes :-)
>>
>> Aha! I'll leave that to someone else then :).
>>
>>
>
> I will try to make time for this over the weekend - hopefully there is
> no conflict between kvm.next and the a15 platform support from
> Catalin's arm-arch tree.
