On 04/06/13 14:13, Anup Patel wrote: Hi Anup, > 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. This is the exact same code, just a slightly different patch split to implement the separate Kconfig option. Thanks for testing, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... -- 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
