On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 06:40:01PM -0800, Michael Kelley wrote:
> arch/x86/coco/core.c | 42 +++++--
> arch/x86/hyperv/hv_init.c | 18 +--
> arch/x86/hyperv/ivm.c | 148 +++++++++++++----------
> arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h | 1 -
> arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h | 3 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h | 16 ++-
> arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h | 4 +
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c | 16 ++-
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c | 22 ++--
> arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 2 +
> arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c | 5 +
> arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_amd.c | 10 +-
> arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c | 3 -
...
> 29 files changed, 440 insertions(+), 439 deletions(-)
The x86 bits look pretty much ready modulo some uncertainties in patch 6.
When this has all been clarified I'm thinking of taking patches
1-2,4-6
through tip and giving an immutable branch to HyperV maintainers to base
the rest ontop...
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
