From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zachary J Estrada <zestrad2@illinois.edu>
Subject: Re: Is kvm-kmod still supported?
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:47:33 -0600
Message-ID: <20151228234733.GA5415@x1>
References: <5681B317.10403@illinois.edu>
 <5681C2BD.9080009@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Cc: <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from pps05.cites.illinois.edu ([192.17.82.72]:45418 "EHLO
	pps05.cites.illinois.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752566AbbL1Xro (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:47:44 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5681C2BD.9080009@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:16:13AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 28/12/2015 23:09, Estrada, Zachary J wrote:
> > I've been maintaining a fork for research and tinkering. Is the kvm-kmod
> > standalone module still supported or should I be using the full Linux
> > tree? I find kvm-kmod convenient to keep the source independent of the
> > kernel tree, but I also want to be using the latest and greatest.
> > 
> > The repository I'm referring to is here:
> > http://git.kiszka.org/?p=kvm-kmod.git;a=summary
> > 
> > However, the "next" branch appears to be out of sync with the latest
> > upstream in the Linux tree.
> 
> I'm using it occasionally and I have patches that bring it up to date,
> but only with recent base kernel versions (3.10+ *should* work).
> 
> Paolo

Got it, found this on github:
https://github.com/bonzini/kvm-kmod.git

Thanks so much!
--Zak