Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Clean up some obsolete code

[Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 12:15:06PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 08/10/15 11:56, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 08/10/15 11:14, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >> Hi Pavel,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 05:44:27PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> >>> Current KVM code has lots of old redundancies, which can be cleaned up.
> >>> This patchset is actually a better alternative to
> >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg430726.html, which allows to
> >>> keep piggy-backed LRs. The idea is based on the fact that our code also
> >>> maintains LR state in elrsr, and this information is enough to track LR
> >>> usage.
> >>>
> >>> This patchset is made against linux-next of 02.10.2015. Thanks to Andre
> >>> for pointing out some 4.3 specifics.
> >>>
> >> I'm not opposed to these changes, they clean up the data structures
> >> which is definitely a good thing.
> >>
> >> I am a bit worries about how/if this is going to conflict with the ITS
> >> series and other patches in flight touchignt he vgic.
> >>
> >> Marc/Andre, any thoughts on this?
> > 
> > I don't mind the simplification (Andre was already removing the
> > piggybacking stuff as part of his ITS series). I'm a bit more cautious
> > about the sync_elrsr stuff, but that's mostly because I've only read the
> > patch in a superficial way.
> > 
> > But yes, this is probably going to clash, unless we make this part of an
> > existing series (/me looks at André... ;-)
> 
> Yes, I am looking at merging this. From the discussion with Pavel I
> remember some things that I disagreed with, so I may propose a follow-up
> patch. I will give this a try tomorrow.
> 
From a maintainer perspective I'd much prefer Andre take these patches
as part of his series and send everything together in one go.

Thanks,
-Christoffer