From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753577Ab3HEOHJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:07:09 -0400 Received: from mx3-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.24]:56361 "EHLO mx3-phx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751055Ab3HEOHH (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:07:07 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:05:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Paolo Bonzini To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Gleb Natapov , Raghavendra K T , mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, jeremy@goop.org, konrad wilk , hpa@zytor.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, peterz@infradead.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, stefano stabellini , andi@firstfloor.org, attilio rao , ouyang@cs.pitt.edu, gregkh@suse.de, agraf@suse.de, chegu vinod , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, avi kivity , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, srivatsa vaddagiri Message-ID: <1952910281.9619371.1375711538505.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130805135222.GA32429@gmail.com> References: <51F0ED31.3040200@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130731062440.GK28372@redhat.com> <51FA1087.9080908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130802092539.GB28327@gmail.com> <20130802095406.GB30072@redhat.com> <20130805094603.GA29303@gmail.com> <20130805095901.GL2258@redhat.com> <20130805135222.GA32429@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V11 15/18] kvm : Paravirtual ticketlocks support for linux guests running on KVM hypervisor MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.5.82.11] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.3_GA_5664 (ZimbraWebClient - SAF5 (Mac)/8.0.3_GA_5664) Thread-Topic: kvm : Paravirtual ticketlocks support for linux guests running on KVM hypervisor Thread-Index: jx6DpRQSa4xLQHdtHrU9Qag3/Sbj0Q== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 11:46:03AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar > > > > > > I guess you'd want to carry this in the KVM tree or so - maybe in a > > > separate branch because it changes Xen as well? > > > > It changes KVM host and guest side, XEN and common x86 spinlock code. I > > think it would be best to merge common x86 spinlock bits and guest side > > KVM/XEN bits through tip tree and host KVM part will go through KVM > > tree. If this is OK with you, Ingo, and XEN folks Raghavendra can send > > two separate patch series one for the tip and one for KVM host side. > > Sure, that's fine - if the initial series works fine in isolation as well > (i.e. won't break anything). It would be a big problem if it didn't! Raghavendra, please send the two separate series as Gleb explained above. Thanks, Paolo