From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] KVM: VMX: Simplify segment_base Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 07:34:15 +0100 Message-ID: <20170222063415.GA27700@gmail.com> References: <20170214194259.75960-1-thgarnie@google.com> <20170221080332.GB3125@gmail.com> <211929849.24027362.1487672898147.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Sender: Ingo Molnar Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <211929849.24027362.1487672898147.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Thomas Garnier , Andy Lutomirski , Jim Mattson , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H . Peter Anvin" , Andrey Ryabinin , Alexander Potapenko , Dmitry Vyukov , Kees Cook , Andy Lutomirski , Borislav Petkov , Paul Gortmaker , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Pavel Machek , Jiri Kosina , Matt Fleming , Ard Biesheuvel , Boris Ostrovsky , Juergen Gross , Rusty Russell , Peter Zijlstra , Christian List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org * Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Paolo, how stable, non-rebasing are the KVM tree commits? > > Whatever ends in linux-next is stable. I have a separate rebasing branch, > but it's not part of linux-next by design. Ok, that's nice! > > Or should we keep Andy's KVM patches together with the GDT patches? Either > > workflow works for me - it's your call as these are predominantly KVM changes. > > I'll delay my pull request to Linus a couple days so that I can test Andy's 6 > patches. Then you can just base your branch on Linus's tree. Fantastic, thank you! Ingo