From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 00:20:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Message-Id: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> List-Id: References: <1401953144-19186-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alexander Graf , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Gleb Natapov , Paolo Bonzini , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> This reserves 2 capability numbers. >> >> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl. >> >> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that >> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's tree >> (correct?). > > They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read: > mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree. > > In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all. So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks. -- Alexey From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f178.google.com (mail-pd0-f178.google.com [209.85.192.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BAE31A0008 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 10:20:38 +1000 (EST) Received: by mail-pd0-f178.google.com with SMTP id v10so1776463pde.37 for ; Thu, 05 Jun 2014 17:20:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 10:20:29 +1000 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Graf , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration References: <1401953144-19186-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Paolo Bonzini List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> This reserves 2 capability numbers. >> >> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl. >> >> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that >> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's tree >> (correct?). > > They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read: > mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree. > > In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all. So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks. -- Alexey From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 10:20:29 +1000 Message-ID: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> References: <1401953144-19186-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Gleb Natapov , Paolo Bonzini , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org To: Alexander Graf , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> This reserves 2 capability numbers. >> >> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl. >> >> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that >> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's tree >> (correct?). > > They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read: > mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree. > > In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all. So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks. -- Alexey