From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDBDCCA479 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234526AbiGGNLl (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:11:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36164 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234508AbiGGNLk (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:11:40 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97A13220E1; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 267D42AX017143; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:37 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=0u3cw8qnLPhH+rDFw145eM7xNajBL24vYjGRXTXk0Zc=; b=IaLpKmxlNu8WaB3kpQhcJn8SCR0NrCg97QclNFu4x9yAUxC4NboLr/VgwV9BM/IC6/sB /aG0FoiYBUUrY1Zi+Qb/yT4DE7aT/Eby6t3VW4B2T+Zne1NyOt01A4uDKQraxWBTbv22 NU9fzgtKqXO90GgK/2FMoF8sT5JqGrHzuldhY0ra49Q+mWsC1ysDxJpiXYjPKj7eOGSs x3ELoQGRDZjGIOXNoQpbhdydWcuL3HIXTgz5DLwZ2671SqnKl/jtjzAXgDY2ZeMss+D8 CtGH6tisBfuvPT4ulghL8vjW9pnkYtjvtzPCAvOOz1ixkoM0FlhHBTUOT5Gu89BV/s1R tA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3h5w5adg5d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 07 Jul 2022 13:11:37 +0000 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 267BUGRP021844; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:36 GMT Received: from ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (ba.79.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.121.186]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3h5w5adg4v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 07 Jul 2022 13:11:35 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 267D6g8v002555; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:35 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3h4ucnueuq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 07 Jul 2022 13:11:35 +0000 Received: from b01ledav001.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav001.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.106]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 267DBYHq33816944 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:34 GMT Received: from b01ledav001.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1F128060; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav001.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB74D2805C; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.211.36.1] (unknown [9.211.36.1]) by b01ledav001.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 13:11:31 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <28f45fa6-0f0f-b854-9b07-c78a3fadff62@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:11:31 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] s390/vfio-ccw rework Content-Language: en-US To: Christian Borntraeger , Alex Williamson , Paolo Bonzini Cc: Eric Farman , Cornelia Huck , Halil Pasic , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Kirti Wankhede , Jason Gunthorpe References: <20220630203647.2529815-1-farman@linux.ibm.com> <20220630234411.GM693670@nvidia.com> <20220704112511.GO693670@nvidia.com> <145a84e4-e228-0f18-eebe-7488f8b07d67@linux.ibm.com> <0b2501e7-0e5c-9bf6-3317-611b96f44c58@linux.ibm.com> From: Matthew Rosato In-Reply-To: <0b2501e7-0e5c-9bf6-3317-611b96f44c58@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: MgA-y3qizdvoAAjMnqtxoVrNZUWHcVM5 X-Proofpoint-GUID: eLqi_GcsBQjbV5y4-uMsM2LbJMWDqmhv Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-07-07_09,2022-06-28_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2206140000 definitions=main-2207070052 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On 7/7/22 9:04 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Am 07.07.22 um 14:34 schrieb Matthew Rosato: >> On 7/7/22 5:06 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> >>> >>> Am 04.07.22 um 13:25 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe: >>>> On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 02:48:25PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 01.07.22 um 14:40 schrieb Eric Farman: >>>>>> On Thu, 2022-06-30 at 20:44 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:36:36PM +0200, Eric Farman wrote: >>>>>>>> Here's an updated pass through the first chunk of vfio-ccw rework. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As with v2, this is all internal to vfio-ccw, with the exception of >>>>>>>> the removal of mdev_uuid from include/linux/mdev.h in patch 1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is one conflict with the vfio-next branch [2], on patch 6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What tree do you plan to take it through? >>>>>> >>>>>> Don't know. I know Matt's PCI series has a conflict with this same >>>>>> patch also, but I haven't seen resolution to that. @Christian, >>>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What about me making a topic branch that it being merged by Alex >>>>> AND the KVM tree >>>>> so that each of the conflicts can be solved in that way? >>>> >>>> It make sense, I would base it on Alex's VFIO tree just to avoid >>>> some conflicts in the first place. Matt can rebase on this, so lets >>>> get things going? >>> >>> So yes. Lets rebase on VFIO-next. Ideally Alex would then directly >>> pick Eric >>> patches. >> >> @Christian to be clear, do you want me to also rebase the zPCI series >> on vfio-next then? > > For that we are probably better of me having a topic branch that is then > merged by Alex > and Paolo. Alex, Paolo, would be make sense? For reference if needed, the zPCI series in question: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/20220606203325.110625-1-mjrosato@linux.ibm.com/ > > As an alternative: will the vfio patches build without the KVM patches > and vice versa, > I assume not? No, there are dependencies in both directions. At this point if the topic branch is how we will proceed then I suggest just taking v9 as-is; the few minor nit comments from Pierre can be addressed as follow-ons if desired.