On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:16:00PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 08/09/2016 12:08, Paul Mackerras wrote: > >> > > >> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu-hash.h | 37 ++++++++++++ > >> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_64.h | 87 +++------------------------ > >> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu.h | 1 + > >> > arch/powerpc/mm/hash_native_64.c | 42 +------------ > >> > arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++ > > This of course touches two maintainers' areas. Michael and Paolo, how > > do you want to proceed here? Can this just go through Michael's tree? > > Or should I make a topic branch off Linus' tree that you can both > > pull, or should I split the patch into two (i.e. everything except the > > kvm_book3s_64.h change in the first patch, and the kvm_book3s_64.h > > change in the second) and get Michael to put the first one in a topic > > branch that I can then pull and apply the second patch onto? > > This patch seems separate from the other two (I can't really tell since > there wasn't a cover letter on linuxppc-dev). Can you place it in a > pull request for both Michael and myself? Yes, it is separate. I have put it in a new kvm-ppc-infrastructure branch, which I have merged into my kvm-ppc-next branch (since there are some other patches on that branch which are prerequisites for some patches in kvm-ppc-next). Michael can pull kvm-ppc-infrastructure when he wants to. I'll send a pull request for kvm-ppc-next tomorrow assuming today's linux-next merge doesn't cause any problems. Paul. -- 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
