On 08/02/2016 10:17 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Linus Torvalds > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> No, I don't use the merge from linux-next directly. I just re-generate >> the merge myself, and if the pull request then includes a merge >> resolution (either as just a verbal description, or a patch or by >> having a separate "merged" test-branch), I will compare my merge with >> that one. > > Ok, the KVM merge was indeed the most painful one this merge window so > far. Which isn't saying all that much, since this merge window has so > far been pretty good (knock wood). > > Let's see if I got everything right. I did pick up the fixup patch > from Sudip and made it part of the merge, so that hopefully it's all > complete and also bisectable. > > Please do check it out. And let's hope the KVM people have learnt > their lesson and we won't have these messy merges in the future. s390 kvm compiles fine and seems to work. (new features vsie, sthyi and cpu model and a simple regression worked fine). Thanks 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
