From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sheng Yang Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v9] Optimize and unify IOAPIC/MSI delivery Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:53:56 +0800 Message-ID: <200902260953.56894.sheng@linux.intel.com> References: <1235553536-32690-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <49A51E3A.1000309@redhat.com> <49A52119.4020405@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:55325 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751338AbZBZByP (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:54:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <49A52119.4020405@redhat.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday 25 February 2009 18:44:41 Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Rebased on latest upstream. The changes are "Report IRQ injection > >> status" > >> related in the second patch. > >> > >> The v8 was acked by Marcelo Tosatti. > > > > I just merged this (and resolved all the conflicts...). I'll see if > > there are any changes between the two sets. > > Gleb tells me that my version is better wrt irq injection status > reporting, so I'll keep it. Oh, after look back, seems I understood the meaning of returning 0 wrong... Just keep it. :) -- regards Yang, Sheng