From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 106691007D4 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 17:57:57 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4C5A6F01.6050705@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:57:53 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/27] KVM PPC PV framework v3 References: <1280407688-9815-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4C557E7A.3010606@redhat.com> <20100803111611.38ca87e6@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> In-Reply-To: <20100803111611.38ca87e6@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev , Alexander Graf , KVM list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 08/03/2010 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 22:21:37 +0200 > Alexander Graf wrote: > >> On 01.08.2010, at 16:02, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >>> Looks reasonable. Since it's fair to say I understand nothing about powerpc, I'd like someone who does to review it and ack, please, with an emphasis on the interfaces. >> Sounds good. Preferably someone with access to the ePAPR spec :). > The ePAPR-relevant stuff in patches 7, 16, and 17 looks reasonable. > Did I miss any ePAPR-relevant stuff in the other patches? Shall I take this as an ACK? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function