From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] call kvm_cpu_synchronize_state() on target vcpu
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 19:36:52 +0300
Message-ID: <20090909163652.GK22885@redhat.com>
References: <20090909153309.GD22885@redhat.com>
 <4AA7CE01.1030808@siemens.com>
 <20090909154919.GE22885@redhat.com>
 <4AA7D074.5010207@siemens.com>
 <20090909160734.GG22885@redhat.com>
 <4AA7D61C.7080004@siemens.com>
 <20090909162751.GI22885@redhat.com>
 <4AA7D8B9.4010906@siemens.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "avi@redhat.com" <avi@redhat.com>, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37780 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753351AbZIIQhB (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 9 Sep 2009 12:37:01 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4AA7D8B9.4010906@siemens.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 06:32:57PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> The patch doesn't touch shared code. (it is almost impossible to tell
> >>> what code is shared and what's not nowadays)
> >> cpu_dump_state() is definitely shared.
> >>
> > Ah this one line. Yes it is. But I have not good commit message for this
> > one liner change for upstream :)
> 
> That's why I suggested to post the corresponding change also for
> upstream. Even if it doesn't need it now, it will one day. :)
> 
I looked at the code. This changes doesn't make sense for upstream right
now IMHO. I do agree that this one linear should go into upstream. I'll
think about commit message tonight.

--
			Gleb.