[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CY4PR21MB0631A5600BA2D2143A071347F1C30@CY4PR21MB0631.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 04:31:32 +0000
From: Jork Loeser <Jork.Loeser@...rosoft.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
CC: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v8 07/10] hyper-v: globalize vp_index
> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@...hat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 19:29
>
> Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:27:33 +0200
> > Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> To support implementing remote TLB flushing on Hyper-V with a
> >> hypercall we need to make vp_index available outside of vmbus module.
> >> Rename and globalize.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> >
> > This is correct, but needs to be rebased.
> > It conflicts with the PCI protocol version 1.2 patches that are in the
> > PCI tree.
>
> :-(
>
> The question is - what do we do? As far as I understand the intent was to push
> this through Greg's char-misc tree. If I rebase it to Bjorn's pci tree patches won't
> apply to char-misc and Greg won't take them. I see three possible ways to go:
> 1) Take them into char-misc and resolve the conflict in merge window (Linus will
> hate us all :-( )
> 2) Ask Greg to merge with Bjorn _now_ so we can send the rebased version.
> 3) Postpone these patches to the next kernel release. No guarantee we won't
> clash with something else :-(
>
> So I'm a bit lost. With Hyper-V drivers scattered across multiple trees we're
> doomed to have such issues with every relatively big series.
I would like to see Vitaly's patch-set being integrated shortly (option 1).
In anticipation of this, the PCI protocol version 1.2 patches duplicate the CPU-ID/vCPU-ID mapping. The conflict thus is "just" a re-naming conflict - taking either old or new is fine (one occurrence of conflict). Is this acceptable for conflict management without instilling undue despise?
That said, I am more than happy to help in the resolution. Also, once both changes are merged, I'll remove the duplicated logic.
Regards,
Jork
Powered by blists - more mailing lists