From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 18:02:55 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 8/8] PPC: Don't use hardcoded opcode for ePAPR hcall invocation Message-Id: <4FF1E24F.5070104@freescale.com> List-Id: References: <1340395568-29620-1-git-send-email-stuart.yoder@freescale.com> <4FF1D618.5030207@freescale.com> <440F1FF6-267A-452C-9665-274F684A1C93@suse.de> <4FF1D75D.4050507@freescale.com> <8694AAE5-6312-4074-BEA3-2953101890D7@suse.de> <4FF1D988.3040602@freescale.com> <4FF1DBB0.1080909@freescale.com> <4FF1DDB8.6010504@freescale.com> <4FF1E000.4050408@freescale.com> <4FF1E11A.5070308@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <4FF1E11A.5070308@freescale.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Scott Wood Cc: Alexander Graf , Stuart Yoder , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Scott Wood wrote: >> > So are you saying that it was wrong before, but it's correct now? > Not really *wrong* before, but unnecessary. In that case, my code was really just ahead of its time. :-) -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 8/8] PPC: Don't use hardcoded opcode for ePAPR hcall invocation Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 13:02:55 -0500 Message-ID: <4FF1E24F.5070104@freescale.com> References: <1340395568-29620-1-git-send-email-stuart.yoder@freescale.com> <4FF1D618.5030207@freescale.com> <440F1FF6-267A-452C-9665-274F684A1C93@suse.de> <4FF1D75D.4050507@freescale.com> <8694AAE5-6312-4074-BEA3-2953101890D7@suse.de> <4FF1D988.3040602@freescale.com> <4FF1DBB0.1080909@freescale.com> <4FF1DDB8.6010504@freescale.com> <4FF1E000.4050408@freescale.com> <4FF1E11A.5070308@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexander Graf , Stuart Yoder , , To: Scott Wood Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FF1E11A.5070308@freescale.com> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Scott Wood wrote: >> > So are you saying that it was wrong before, but it's correct now? > Not really *wrong* before, but unnecessary. In that case, my code was really just ahead of its time. :-) -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale