On 21.05.2011, at 19:00, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 21.05.2011, at 18:41, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> >> On 19.05.2011, at 07:22, Paul Mackerras wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 02:42:08PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >>>> On 05/17/2011 02:38 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> What would be the path for these patches to get upstream? Would this >>>>>> stuff normally go through Avi's tree? There is a bit of a >>>>>> complication in that they are based on Ben's next branch. Would Avi >>>>>> pull Ben's next branch, or would they go in via Ben's tree? >>>>> >>>>> Usually the ppc tree gets merged into Avi's tree and goes on from >>>>> there. When we have interdependencies, we can certainly do it >>>>> differently though. We can also shove them through Ben's tree this >>>>> time around, as there are more dependencies on ppc code than KVM >>>>> code. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, both options are fine. If it goes through kvm.git I can merge >>>> Ben's tree (provided it is append-only) and apply the kvm-ppc >>>> patches on top. >>> >>> OK, the easiest thing is for them to go via Ben's tree, I think, since >>> they depend so much on other stuff in Ben's tree. >>> >>> Alex, could you give Ben an acked-by for patches 1-8 of the series? >>> There haven't been any changes requested for them. >> >> With ben's tree merged into avi's tree and your patches applied on top, MOL breaks. I'll have to track down why exactly though. > > In fact, qemu-system-ppc64 -enable-kvm also breaks. Only ben's tree merged into avi's tree works fine. So it's definitely one of your patches from 1-8 (except for 2,3 which are already in Ben's tree). Alex -- 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
