On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 01:55:23PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 16/05/20 11:36, Huacai Chen wrote: > >> I'm happy to see you taking care of the KVM part. So how is your plan > >> to handle patches ? Do want to collect them and send pull requests to > >> me ? Or should I just pick them up with your Acked-by ? > > I think we can only use the second method, because both Aleksandar and > > me don't have a kernel tree in kernel.org now. > > If you don't mind, I generally prefer to have MIPS changs submitted > through the KVM tree, because KVM patches rarely have intrusive changes > in generic arch files. It's more common to have generic KVM patches > that require touching all architectures. works for me. > For 5.8 I don't have anything planned that could cause conflicts, so > this time it doesn't matter; but I can pick these up too if Thomas acks > patches 6, 12 and 14. I've acked all three pacthes Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
