All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: pbonzini@redhat.com (Paolo Bonzini)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Planning the merge of KVM/arm64
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 17:51:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51AE0D0D.3030106@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMJs5B9PxHfUrugov4HJknQ24fG7MNp8obziqu9dnSztsGBksQ@mail.gmail.com>

Il 04/06/2013 17:43, Christoffer Dall ha scritto:
> Hi Paolo,
> 
> I don't think this is an issue. Gleb and Marcelo for example pulled
> RMK's stable tree for my KVM/ARM updates for the 3.10 merge window and
> that wasn't an issue.  If Linus pulls the kvm/next tree first the
> diffstat should be similar and everything clean enough, no?
> 
> Catalin has previously expressed his wish to upstream the kvm/arm64
> patches directly through him given the churn in a completely new
> architecture and he wants to make sure that everything looks right.
> 
> It's a pretty clean implementation with quite few dependencies and
> merging as a working series should be a priority instead of the
> Kconfig hack, imho.

Ok, let's see what Gleb says.

Paolo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	Christoffer Dall <c.dall@virtualopensystems.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Planning the merge of KVM/arm64
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 17:51:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51AE0D0D.3030106@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMJs5B9PxHfUrugov4HJknQ24fG7MNp8obziqu9dnSztsGBksQ@mail.gmail.com>

Il 04/06/2013 17:43, Christoffer Dall ha scritto:
> Hi Paolo,
> 
> I don't think this is an issue. Gleb and Marcelo for example pulled
> RMK's stable tree for my KVM/ARM updates for the 3.10 merge window and
> that wasn't an issue.  If Linus pulls the kvm/next tree first the
> diffstat should be similar and everything clean enough, no?
> 
> Catalin has previously expressed his wish to upstream the kvm/arm64
> patches directly through him given the churn in a completely new
> architecture and he wants to make sure that everything looks right.
> 
> It's a pretty clean implementation with quite few dependencies and
> merging as a working series should be a priority instead of the
> Kconfig hack, imho.

Ok, let's see what Gleb says.

Paolo

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-04 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-04 12:29 Planning the merge of KVM/arm64 Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 12:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 13:13 ` Anup Patel
2013-06-04 13:13   ` Anup Patel
2013-06-04 13:19   ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 13:19     ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 13:41   ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-04 13:41     ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-04 14:50 ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-04 14:50   ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-04 14:59   ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 14:59     ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 15:30     ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-04 15:30       ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-04 15:40       ` Will Deacon
2013-06-04 15:40         ` Will Deacon
2013-06-04 15:48         ` Steve Capper
2013-06-04 15:48           ` Steve Capper
2013-06-04 15:42       ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 15:42         ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-04 15:43       ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-04 15:43         ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-04 15:51         ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-06-04 15:51           ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-04 16:37           ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-04 16:37             ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-05  5:57             ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-05  5:57               ` Christoffer Dall
2013-06-05  6:01               ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-05  6:01                 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-05  9:31                 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-05  9:31                   ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-05 12:57                   ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-05 12:57                     ` Gleb Natapov
2013-06-05 13:13                     ` Marc Zyngier
2013-06-05 13:13                       ` Marc Zyngier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=51AE0D0D.3030106@redhat.com \
    --to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.