From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Clean up some obsolete code Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 11:56:04 +0100 Message-ID: <56164BC4.80104@arm.com> References: <20151008101408.GA20936@cbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Andre Przywara , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Christoffer Dall , Pavel Fedin Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151008101408.GA20936@cbox> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 08/10/15 11:14, Christoffer Dall wrote: > Hi Pavel, > = > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 05:44:27PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: >> Current KVM code has lots of old redundancies, which can be cleaned up. >> This patchset is actually a better alternative to >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg430726.html, which allows to >> keep piggy-backed LRs. The idea is based on the fact that our code also >> maintains LR state in elrsr, and this information is enough to track LR >> usage. >> >> This patchset is made against linux-next of 02.10.2015. Thanks to Andre >> for pointing out some 4.3 specifics. >> > I'm not opposed to these changes, they clean up the data structures > which is definitely a good thing. > = > I am a bit worries about how/if this is going to conflict with the ITS > series and other patches in flight touchignt he vgic. > = > Marc/Andre, any thoughts on this? I don't mind the simplification (Andre was already removing the piggybacking stuff as part of his ITS series). I'm a bit more cautious about the sync_elrsr stuff, but that's mostly because I've only read the patch in a superficial way. But yes, this is probably going to clash, unless we make this part of an existing series (/me looks at Andr=E9... ;-) M. -- = Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...