From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NSwok-0003vE-Fg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:10:42 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NSwof-0003s6-Q8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:10:42 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49383 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NSwof-0003ru-L5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:10:37 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:18755) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NSwof-0005WW-C6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:10:37 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NSwoe-00050y-Ge for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:10:36 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 20:10:32 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add KVM paravirt cpuid leaf Message-ID: <20100107181032.GD4537@redhat.com> References: <20100107124449.GY4905@redhat.com> <4B46072C.80909@codemonkey.ws> <20100107161503.GE4905@redhat.com> <4B46118A.9050101@codemonkey.ws> <4B46123F.7000501@redhat.com> <20100107170822.GB4537@redhat.com> <4B462199.2020902@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B462199.2020902@codemonkey.ws> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Avi Kivity , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 12:02:01PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 01/07/2010 11:08 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 06:56:31PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>On 01/07/2010 06:53 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >>>I don't want to deviate unnecessarily from qemu-kvm so we can > >>>approach this in one of two ways. We can remove the guard in > >>>qemu-kvm and Avi can send me a pull request with this feature. I > >>>can also just pull in the patch as-is and we can fix this in both > >>>places later. I'm happy either way. > >>Let's go through qemu-kvm.git. I'll post information about the > >>queue policy soon. > >> > >Till yesterday it was other way around. > > > Not qemu-kvm.git master, but a for_upstream branch that actually > tracks qemu.git. The point is to get Avi involved in shaping the > way kvm support in qemu.git evolves so that we can converge. > Ah, that's OK then. > > May be switch rules after > >applying the patch? > > Let's give Avi a chance to get his tree setup. We can revisit in a > couple days if necessary. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >-- > > Gleb. -- Gleb.