From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: remove buggy vcpu id check on vcpu creation
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 18:08:41 +0200
Message-ID: <20160421160841.GD25335@potion>
References: <146116689259.20666.15860134511726195550.stgit@bahia.huguette.org>
 <20160420182909.GB4044@potion>
 <20160421132958.0e9292d5@bahia.huguette.org>
 <20160421152916.GA30356@potion>
 <20160421174956.1049e0a5@bahia.huguette.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, james.hogan@imgtec.com,
	mingo@redhat.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org,
	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Greg Kurz <gkurz@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47978 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751565AbcDUQIr (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 21 Apr 2016 12:08:47 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160421174956.1049e0a5@bahia.huguette.org>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

2016-04-21 17:49+0200, Greg Kurz:
> So we're good ?

I support the change, just had a nit about API design for v2.

>                 Whose tree can carry these patches ?

(PowerPC is the only immediately affected arch, so I'd it there.)

What do you think is best?  My experience in this regard is pretty low.