From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX/PATCH 0/6] kvm-s390 fixes
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 12:51:53 +0200
Message-ID: <1211539913.32214.9.camel@localhost>
References: <1211369829.6194.10.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
	 <48353AF9.8040600@qumranet.com>
Reply-To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	heicars2 <heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Olaf Schnapper <os@de.ibm.com>,
	"kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mtagate8.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.157]:48058 "EHLO
	mtagate8.de.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753633AbYEWLCz (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 23 May 2008 07:02:55 -0400
Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49])
	by mtagate8.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4NB2FAx375006
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 23 May 2008 11:02:15 GMT
Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228])
	by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m4NB2FEl3514478
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 23 May 2008 13:02:15 +0200
Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m4NB2Els004032
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 23 May 2008 13:02:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: <48353AF9.8040600@qumranet.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 12:20 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > this series contains a few Bug fixes of issues that we've identified. I
> > consider them all safe for 2.6.26, and in fact some of them fix serious
> > issues in the current upstream code.
> >
> >   
> 
> Applied and queued all.  Martin, can you ack patch 2, which is in s390 
> code, not kvm code (although it is only triggered when kvm is invoked 
> AFAICT).

You could argue about the s390_enable_sie() function if it is
architecture code or kvm code. Its sole purpose is to make it possible
to execute sie. But I've sent the Acked-by.

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.