Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm/arm64: KVM: MMIO support for BE guest

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

Il 12/11/2013 11:03, Marc Zyngier ha scritto:
>> > 
>> > I'd cast my vote (if I have one) towards the sharing a tree method. For
>> > those of us scrambling to get caught up with kvmarm, a reduction in the
>> > number of trees and branches we need to track would be a welcome change.
> Not sure what the benefit would be. We'd go from two trees with
> respectively x and y branches, to a single tree with x+y branches.
> 
> Christoffer and I tend to work on separate topics, we track what the
> other does, and we make sure we don't overlap. And if we do, we shove
> the related patches in the same branch. Overall, whether or not we
> switch to co-maintainership, I don't expect our workflow to change much.

Yes, I think your workflow is fine as is.

Andrew, with two co-maintainers Christoffer and Marc would probably send
more frequent pull requests.  You're probably better off sending them
patches based on kvm/next directly.

Paolo