From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: Resend: patch: qemu + hugetlbfs.. Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 14:12:01 -0200 Message-ID: <20090205161201.GA5403@amt.cnet> References: <48764DAF.6060502@codemonkey.ws> <48766E03.4090901@third-harmonic.com> <48767558.50301@codemonkey.ws> <48767B20.20806@third-harmonic.com> <4876815E.3010109@codemonkey.ws> <48B33AAD.8000508@third-harmonic.com> <496FEECB.2060208@third-harmonic.com> <4975A78B.1060101@redhat.com> <497A34EA.3050703@redhat.com> <498B08EA.4020908@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: john cooper , john cooper , kvm@vger.kernel.org, aliguori@us.ibm.com To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:54931 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751955AbZBEQOk (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:14:40 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <498B08EA.4020908@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 05:42:34PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > john cooper wrote: >> Avi Kivity wrote: >>> john cooper wrote: >>>> This trivial patch never did manage to find its way >>>> in. Marcelo called it to my attention earlier in >>>> the week. I've tweaked it to apply to kvm-83 and >>>> the resulting patch is attached. I've left the >>>> prior e-mail discussion below for reference. >>>> >>> >>> Sorry for missing this (copying me helps). Please resubmit with a >>> signoff.Also, please protect with #ifdef MAP_POPULATE to ease merging >>> into upstream eventually. >> Updated patch attached. >> > > Sorry, still rejects horribly. What did you generate this against? > > The kernel/ part seems unrelated. This was merged through the kvm-devel branch (unless you dropped it).