Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: ... > - arch/powerpc: what a mess. For the idle_book3s.S conflict, the KVM > tree is the right one; everything else is trivial. In this case I am > not quite sure what went wrong. The commit that is causing the mess > (fd7bacbca47a, "KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix TB corruption in guest exit > path on HMI interrupt", 2016-05-15) touches both arch/powerpc/kernel/ > and arch/powerpc/kvm/. It's large, but at 396 insertions/5 deletions > I guessed that it wasn't really possible to split it and that the 5 > deletions wouldn't conflict. That wasn't the case. In fact I think the problem is that this patch shouldn't have gone via the KVM tree at all. If you look at the diffstat, it doesn't touch anything in generic KVM, but lots of arch code: arch/powerpc/include/asm/hmi.h | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++ arch/powerpc/include/asm/paca.h | 6 +++ arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile | 2 +- arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S | 4 +- arch/powerpc/kernel/hmi.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.S | 5 ++- arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c | 5 +++ arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++ arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_ras.c | 176 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- Presumably Paul wanted it in his kvm-ppc tree so it would be tested with the rest of the KVM stuff, but we should have done that with a topic branch in the powerpc tree, that we both merged. cheers -- 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
