From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: Breakage due to commit c1699988 ("v3: don't call reset functions on cpu initialization") Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:01:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4B0BAF04.40500@redhat.com> References: <4B094DC4.1000107@redhat.com> <20091123190059.GD11530@mothafucka.localdomain> <5d6222a80911231307h52c9919w23927942b425e852@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Glauber Costa , KVM list To: Glauber Costa Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16900 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932500AbZKXKBj (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:01:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5d6222a80911231307h52c9919w23927942b425e852@mail.gmail.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/23/2009 11:07 PM, Glauber Costa wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Glauber Costa wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 04:42:12PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >>> A qemu-kvm which merges this commit breaks badly (see qemu-kvm.git next >>> branch). In the commit log for this commit, you write >>> >>> I tested it with qemu (with and without io-thread) and qemu-kvm, and it >>> seems to be doing okay - although qemu-kvm uses a slightly different >>> patch. >>> >>> Can you share the slightly different patch (against 'next') please? >>> >> Sorry, I don't follow. You said you tested it and it works, so what exactly >> do we need from me here? >> > FYI: Combining that patch with a later fix from Juan fix the issue for qemu-kvm. > (504c2948) > Also, the patch seems to apply fine ontop of next. > > I can send a combined version if you want, or you can combine it yourself > > That commit is already merged. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function