Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Reply-To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2023 13:49:24 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <20231027204933.3651381-1-seanjc@google.com>
Subject: [GIT PULL] KVM: x86 pull requests for 6.7
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

I know you said a cover letter isn't necessary, but sending everything all at
once helps me keep track of things, and git send-email replying to whatever
random pull request happens to come first alphabetically bugs me.

  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: APIC changes for 6.7
  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: Documentation updates for 6.7
  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: Misc changes for 6.7
  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: PMU change for 6.7
  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: SVM changes for 6.7
  [GIT PULL] KVM: x86: Xen changes for 6.7

Don't get used to the low volume, the next few cycles are likely to be chonkers.
But, I have started using dedicated topic branches for larger series, e.g. for
guest_memfd and LAM support, and I'll send pull requests for such branches much
earlier in the cycle.  So, in theory, the size of the pull requests that come in
just before the merge window will still be relatively small.

Speaking of pull requests coming in just before the merge window, I meant to get
these sent out earlier this week, but guest_memfd happened.  At least it looks
like I'll still beat Oliver, which is all that matters :-)