On 25.01.20 12:31, Christian Borntraeger wrote: [..] > Nope > > There is another kvm instance in that function. > Something like the following does the trick. > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > index 0f475af84c0a..8646c99217f2 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > @@ -3061,8 +3061,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > goto out_free_sie_block; > } > > - VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, > - vcpu->arch.sie_block); > + VM_EVENT(vcpu->kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", > + vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block); > trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block); > > rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu); > > > It is still compiling, test will take a while. But please push the fixup. This will help with our > automation that picks up linux-next. The quick sniff with this fixup on top of your fixup looks good.
