From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753659AbeEOQHc (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2018 12:07:32 -0400 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:41502 "EHLO aserp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751099AbeEOQHa (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2018 12:07:30 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 12:06:58 -0400 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: "Raslan, KarimAllah" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "rkrcmar@redhat.com" , "david@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface Message-ID: <20180515160658.GA12122@char.us.oracle.com> References: <1523829198-13236-1-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de> <1523880592.22952.9.camel@amazon.de> <34b4c91d-46f0-1205-5850-f13ccb70d496@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <34b4c91d-46f0-1205-5850-f13ccb70d496@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8894 signatures=668698 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1805150162 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.home.local id w4FG7aIx000513 On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote: > >> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch. > > Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I > > just thought that I get those bits out first. > > It's the same for me. > > Paolo > > >> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together. > > Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the  > > lifecycle change! > > > > Thanks for the review :) > > > >> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it. Did anybody else end up reviewing these patches? And would it make sense to repost a new version with the #4 and #9 squashed? Thanks. >