From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: RFC: s390: extension capability for new address space layout Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:11:48 +0300 Message-ID: <4E788304.2050008@redhat.com> References: <4E787F7A.2070600@de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Alexander Graf , Heiko Carstens , Carsten Otte , KVM list , Martin Schwidefsky To: Christian Borntraeger Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44914 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753161Ab1ITML5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:11:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4E787F7A.2070600@de.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/20/2011 02:56 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Avi,Marcelo, > > 598841ca9919d008b520114d8a4378c4ce4e40a1 ([S390] use gmap address > spaces for kvm guest images) changed kvm on s390 to use a separate > address space for kvm guests. We can now put KVM guests anywhere > in the user address mode with a size up to 8PB - as long as the > memory is 1MB-aligned. This change was done without KVM extension > capability bit. > The change was added after 3.0, but we still have a chance to add > a feature bit before 3.1 (keeping the releases in a sane state). > > Can you have a look at the change below and give you ACK or NACK? > If ok, I would push this patch to Heiko to be submitted via the > s390 stream for 3.1. ACK, with Alex's changes. Why are kvm changes not going in through the kvm tree? Or at least kvm@ review? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function