Re: Preparing kvm/next for first pull request of 3.15 merge window

Paul Mackerras
2014-03-26T11:46:56Z

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 26/03/2014 04:51, Paul Mackerras ha scritto:
> >>> I would like to know from ARM and PPC maintainers *now* (before the
> >>> merge window opens) what will be in 3.15. Also, PPC guys, please
> >>> make sure the pull requests will be based on commit e724f080f5dd
> >>> (KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix register usage when loading/saving VRSAVE,
> >>> 2014-03-13).
> >Alex has 5 commits in his kvm-ppc-queue branch that should go in.
> >That tree is based on your kvm-3.14-2 tag, not on e724f080f5dd.
> >Would you accept a pull request for that from me on Alex's behalf
> >since he's away?
>
> Yes, of course.
>
> >Do you need me to rebase it at all?
>
> These are:
>
> 1ac4484979 PPC: KVM: Introduce hypervisor call H_GET_TCE
> e0a7be38c9 PPC: KVM: fix RESUME_GUEST check before returning from
> kvmppc_run_core()
> 013e98e657 PPC: KVM: fix RESUME_GUEST check before ending CEDE in
> kvmppc_run_core()
> e8a7f11fe0 PPC: KVM: fix VCPU run for HV KVM (v2)
> 26d96ec97c PPC: KVM: introduce helper to check RESUME_GUEST and related
>
> I would consider rebasing; but you know better than me the effect of
> the two host-crash-fixing patches and how the
> testability/bisectability of kvm-ppc-queue is affected.
>
> In particular, how likely is it that reverse-bisection ("which
> commit fixed the bug?") would end up on e724f080f5dd rather than one
> of the four RESUME_GUEST commits?

OK, based on that and the fact that 4 of those commits should ideally
be combined into one (as Greg commented), I will apply those changes
as two commits on top of e724f080f5dd, followed by the 8 that I posted
recently, and send you a pull request.

Thanks,
Paul.