From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Schwidefsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: s390: wire up bpb feature Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:27:32 +0100 Message-ID: <20180118072732.095bfddb@mschwideX1> References: <1516182519-10623-6-git-send-email-schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> <20180117134434.48676-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <887651e4-10fa-9bd1-0ce6-091235a9b085@redhat.com> <90ae6d5a-9f86-964b-74ca-e0971a11f497@de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Hildenbrand , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck , Paolo Bonzini , Radim =?UTF-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Heiko Carstens , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jon Masters , Marcus Meissner , Jiri Kosina To: Christian Borntraeger Return-path: In-Reply-To: <90ae6d5a-9f86-964b-74ca-e0971a11f497@de.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:43:24 +0100 Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Conny can you review and ack as well? > > Paolo, Radim, > > As the other patches need to sync on the ifetch/nospec/gmb naming I have changed my mind. :-) > This patch is independent from the other patches (as it just provides the guest facilities not caring > about what the host does). > > It seems that you do a kvm pull request for 4.15 anyway (for power), so it might make sense to > apply this patch as well for 4.15. this will make it easier to also upstream the QEMU part in time > as we need the uabi interfaces. Indeed, there is no real dependency. I am thinking about doing a split of my patches as well, everything but the gmb/nospec_xxx/ifetch/isync/whatever part. The prctl part needs some more discussion, as will prepare a patch. Or two. -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.