linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] kvm: make vcpu life cycle separated from kvm instance

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4EFAEF40.3090407@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Dec 2011 12:28:16 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp>
CC:	Liu Ping Fan <kernelfans@...il.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aliguori@...ibm.com, gleb@...hat.com,
	mtosatti@...hat.com, xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com,
	jan.kiszka@....de, Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] kvm: make vcpu life cycle separated from kvm instance

On 12/28/2011 12:19 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
>> Oops, that's only needed when the unplug API is introduced.
>>
>
>
> I think it is OK to to add such an API later on, but I really want
> the author to write the plan in the changelog.

It was in fact in the beginning of the thread. 

> I am not objecting to this patch itself, but the way this kind of change
> is being introduced seems not be in a good manner.

It should be part of a patch series that adds the API, otherwise it will
never be tested.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/