On 09/04/2012 03:51 PM, Mathias Krause wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 09/04/2012 03:09 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> On 08/30/2012 02:30 AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >>>> As the the compiler ensures that the memory operand is always aligned >>>> to a 16 byte memory location, >>> >>> I'm not sure it does. Is V4SI aligned? Do we use alignof() to >>> propagate the alignment to the vcpu allocation code? > > I checked that to by introducing a dummy char member in struct operand > that would have misaligned vec_val but, indeed, the compiler ensured > it's still 16 byte aligned. Ok. > >> >> We actually do. But please rebase the series against next, I got some >> conflicts while applying. > > If "next" means kvm/next > (i.e.git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git#next) here, the > whole series applies cleanly for me. > HEAD in kvm/next is 9a78197 "KVM: x86: remove unused variable from > kvm_task_switch()" here. Albeit the series was build against kvm/next > at the time as a81aba1 "KVM: VMX: Ignore segment G and D bits when > considering whether we can virtualize" was HEAD in this branch. > > Could you please retry and show me the conflicts you get? I tried again and it applies cleanly now, so it must have been a user error earlier. All applied, thanks. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
