On 02/05/14 20:14, David Ahern wrote: > On 5/2/14, 3:16 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote: [...] >> CC-ing David Ahern >> > I don't have the original emails, but looking at > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/25/331 > > > [PATCH 01/11] s390: add sie exit reasons tables > [PATCH 02/11] KVM: s390: Use trace tables from sie.h > [PATCH 03/11] KVM: s390: decoder of SIE intercepted instructions > [PATCH 04/11] KVM: s390: Use intercept_insn decoder in trace event > - not perf related > > > [PATCH 05/11] perf kvm: Intoduce HAVE_KVM_STAT_SUPPORT flag > [PATCH 06/11] perf kvm: simplify of exit reasons tables definitions > [PATCH 07/11] perf kvm: Refactoring of cpu_isa_config() > [PATCH 10/11] perf: allow to use cpuinfo on s390 > Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@xxxxxxxxx> > > > [PATCH 09/11] perf kvm: use defines of kvm events > - KVM team should ack kvm.h change Paolo, any chance to ack these changes? > - perf side looks fine to me > > [PATCH 11/11] perf kvm: add stat support on s390 > - like to see the arch bits moved to arch/x86 and arch/s390 rather than adding #ifdefs > - disabling ioport and mmio options is ok, but if you are going to compile it out update the documentation accordingly. > > David > Thanks. Question is now how to proceed: Patch 1-4 are s390/kvm specific. I am s390/kvm maintainer, so I can hereby Ack them. Patch 5-10 are perf specific Patch 11 is s390/kvm/perf specific and needs both patch series as a base. I see several variants for the next submission: a: all patches via Paolos KVM tree b: all patches via perf tree (e.g. via Jiri) c: via both trees. (e.g. I prepare a git branch based on 3.15-rc1 so that during next merge window the common history should make most things work out fine) d: patch 1-4 via KVM, patch 5-10 via perf, patch 11 after both trees are merged into Linus Christian -- 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
