From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Borntraeger Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call for agenda for 2016-03-01 Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:56:22 +0100 Message-ID: <56D59F86.2070707@de.ibm.com> References: <87mvqr7865.fsf@emacs.mitica> <56CEBE02.6090200@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pkrempa@redhat.com, Eduardo Habkost , Bharata B Rao , Igor Mammedov , David Gibson , =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= To: Thomas Huth , quintela@redhat.com, KVM devel mailing list , QEMU Developer Return-path: Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.106]:60978 "EHLO e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752636AbcCAN45 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2016 08:56:57 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 13:56:54 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by d06dlp03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C598E1B0805F for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 13:56:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.250]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u21DuOLd54919186 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 13:56:24 GMT Received: from d06av09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u21DuNr9023915 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:56:24 -0700 In-Reply-To: <56CEBE02.6090200@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/25/2016 09:40 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 23.02.2016 16:33, Juan Quintela wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering. >> >> At the end of Monday I will send an email with the agenda or the >> cancellation of the call, so hurry up. > > Shall we talk about CPU hotplug again? There are a lot of discussions > going on, but as far as I can tell, it seems there is still no 100% > common understanding yet how the final solution should really look like... > > Thomas Hmpf. I have seen this too late. Can you cc some s390 folks the next time?