From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-next 2/2] kvm: remove dead code Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 16:18:40 +0100 Message-ID: <52C2E050.4060302@redhat.com> References: <20131229121229.19a97822@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <20131229121308.58f2a077@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <20131230073715.GB6244@minantech.com> <20131230142720.2802b3b1@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Gleb Natapov , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-ea0-f178.google.com ([209.85.215.178]:43870 "EHLO mail-ea0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753639Ab3LaPSq (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Dec 2013 10:18:46 -0500 Received: by mail-ea0-f178.google.com with SMTP id d10so5527636eaj.37 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 07:18:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20131230142720.2802b3b1@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 30/12/2013 23:27, Stephen Hemminger ha scritto: >> > It was added recently by Cornelia (copied) with intention to be used in s390 >> > code. I assume the intention is still there. > The normal process is that the code is added in one patch just > before the code that uses it. Rather than the "if we build it they will come" > philosophy. I'm fairly sure that was not the intention; rather, "we built it but we haven't sent a pull request for whatever reason". Paolo