Hi Marc, On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Guys, > > The KVM/arm64 code is now, as it seems, in good enough shape to be > merged. I've so far addressed all the comments, and it doesn't seem any > worse then what is queued for its 32bit counterpart. > > For reference, it is sitting there: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git > kvm-arm64/kvm > > What is not defined yet is the merge path: > - It is touching some of the arm64 core code, so it would be better if > it was merged through the arm64 tree > - It is depending on some of the patches in the core KVM queue (the > vgic/timer move to virt/kvm/arm/) > - It is also depending on some of the patches that are in the KVM/ARM > queue (parametrized timer interrupt, some MMU/MMIO fixes) > > So I can see two possibilities: > - Either I can rely on a stable branch from both KVM and KVM/ARM trees > on which I can base my tree for Catalin/Will to pull, > - Or I ask Catalin to only pull the arm64 part *minus the Kconfig*, and > only merge this last bit when the dependencies are satisfied in Linus' tree. > > What do you guys think? I had quick look at your kvm-arm64/kvm branch. I agree with the approach of going through arm64 tree. FYI, latest tested branch on APM ARMv8 board is kvm-arm64/kvm-3.10-rc3 branch. >From my side, +1 for the second option that is "pull the arm64 part *minus the Kconfig*, and ..." > > Thanks, > > M. > -- > Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... > > > _______________________________________________ > kvmarm mailing list > kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm Regards, Anup -- 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
