From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 21:12:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Message-Id: <53AB3B28.3040708@suse.de> List-Id: References: <1401953144-19186-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> In-Reply-To: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alexey Kardashevskiy , 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 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > 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. So? Are you going to address the comments? Alex From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B86341A0008 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2014 07:12:17 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <53AB3B28.3040708@suse.de> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 23:12:08 +0200 From: Alexander Graf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Kardashevskiy , 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> <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> In-Reply-To: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed 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 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > 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. So? Are you going to address the comments? Alex From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 23:12:08 +0200 Message-ID: <53AB3B28.3040708@suse.de> References: <1401953144-19186-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <53905B14.5020204@suse.de> <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed 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: Alexey Kardashevskiy , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5391094D.7090104@ozlabs.ru> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > 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. So? Are you going to address the comments? Alex