Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751584AbcDURTS (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:19:18 -0400 Received: from e06smtp08.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.104]:40817 "EHLO e06smtp08.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751485AbcDURTQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:19:16 -0400 X-IBM-Helo: d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: gkurz@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: kvm@vger.kernel.org;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 19:18:50 +0200 From: Greg Kurz To: Radim =?UTF-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= Cc: Paolo Bonzini , james.hogan@imgtec.com, mingo@redhat.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Cornelia Huck , Paul Mackerras , David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: remove buggy vcpu id check on vcpu creation Message-ID: <20160421191850.65a07e86@bahia.huguette.org> In-Reply-To: <20160421160841.GD25335@potion> References: <146116689259.20666.15860134511726195550.stgit@bahia.huguette.org> <20160420182909.GB4044@potion> <20160421132958.0e9292d5@bahia.huguette.org> <20160421152916.GA30356@potion> <20160421174956.1049e0a5@bahia.huguette.org> <20160421160841.GD25335@potion> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16042117-0033-0000-0000-00001264114E Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 735 Lines: 29 On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 18:08:41 +0200 Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2016-04-21 17:49+0200, Greg Kurz: > > So we're good ? > > I support the change, just had a nit about API design for v2. > As I said in my other mail, I'm not sure we should do more... if that's okay for you and you still support the change, maybe you can give an Acked-by ? > > Whose tree can carry these patches ? > > (PowerPC is the only immediately affected arch, so I'd it there.) > > What do you think is best? My experience in this regard is pretty low. > Maybe Paolo's tree but I guess we'd need some more acks from x86, ARM and PowerPC :) KVM maintainers... Thanks anyway for your valuable help ! Cheers. -- Greg