Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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). Yeah. I've merged 1/3 as a fix, and will take 2/3 into next. > Can you place it in a pull request for both Michael and myself? Paul and I talked about this offline, he's going to create a topic branch with this in it. I'll hold off merging it until closer to the merge window, and I'll merge it then if we are actually seeing conflicts between the PPC & KVM trees caused by this. 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
