From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] kvm: make vcpu life cycle separated from kvm instance Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 12:28:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4EFAEF40.3090407@redhat.com> References: <1324091975-20930-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> <1324975139-8836-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> <4EFAE72D.3080609@redhat.com> <4EFAE74F.7000200@redhat.com> <4EFAED2E.6090403@oss.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Liu Ping Fan , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aliguori@us.ibm.com, gleb@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com, jan.kiszka@web.de, Takuya Yoshikawa To: Takuya Yoshikawa Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40961 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752755Ab1L1K2Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2011 05:28:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4EFAED2E.6090403@oss.ntt.co.jp> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/28/2011 12:19 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: >> Oops, that's only needed when the unplug API is introduced. >> > > > I think it is OK to to add such an API later on, but I really want > the author to write the plan in the changelog. It was in fact in the beginning of the thread. > I am not objecting to this patch itself, but the way this kind of change > is being introduced seems not be in a good manner. It should be part of a patch series that adds the API, otherwise it will never be tested. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function