On 02/07/2014 04:39 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 06.02.2014, at 17:36, Greg Kurz <gkurz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> As discussed in this thread: >> >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/309166/ >> >> We need some consistency in the way we check whether the guest >> should resume or not because: >> - new RESUME_GUEST_XXX values may show up >> - more locations in KVM may need to perform a similar check >> >> This serie introduces a helper and patches the locations where it >> should be called. There is yet another location in __kvmppc_vcpu_run, >> but it is assembly and cannot call a C inlined function. > > Thanks, applied all to kvm-ppc-queue. I think the splitting on this one is quite excessive - a single patch would've done :). Why did it get applied immediately? #3 or #4 (I do not remember for sure) break HV KVM, this is why I do not repost it and keep trying Paul to reply to the initial thread. -- Alexey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
