[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200421081151.GG11134@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:11:51 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] KVM: VMX: Unionize vcpu_vmx.exit_reason
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 08:07:49AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 03:44:06PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 15/04/20 19:55, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > For now I committed only patches 1-9, just to limit the conflicts with
> > the other series. I would like to understand how you think the
> > conflicts should be fixed with the union.
>
> Pushed a branch. Basically, take the union code and then make sure there
> aren't any vmcs_read32(VM_EXIT_INTR_INFO) or vmcs_readl(EXIT_QUALIFICATION)
> calls outside of the caching accessors or dump_vmcs().
>
> https://github.com/sean-jc/linux for_paolo_merge_union_cache
Sent v3, seemed easier than having you decipher my merge resolution and
then fix more conflicts with kvm/queue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists