[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f093f6cf-4892-7c8f-d3aa-e908d5740cba@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 21:04:37 +0800
From: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: pbonzini@...hat.com, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de, paulus@...abs.org,
mpe@...erman.id.au, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, frankja@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com,
cohuck@...hat.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, james.morse@....com, julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com,
suzuki.poulose@....com, christoffer.dall@....com,
peterx@...hat.com, thuth@...hat.com, chenhuacai@...il.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] KVM: arm64: clean up redundant 'kvm_run'
parameters
On 2020/5/5 16:39, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Tianjia,
>
> On 2020-04-27 05:35, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>> In the current kvm version, 'kvm_run' has been included in the 'kvm_vcpu'
>> structure. For historical reasons, many kvm-related function parameters
>> retain the 'kvm_run' and 'kvm_vcpu' parameters at the same time. This
>> patch does a unified cleanup of these remaining redundant parameters.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> On the face of it, this looks OK, but I haven't tried to run the
> resulting kernel. I'm not opposed to taking this patch *if* there
> is an agreement across architectures to take the series (I value
> consistency over the janitorial exercise).
>
> Another thing is that this is going to conflict with the set of
> patches that move the KVM/arm code back where it belongs (arch/arm64/kvm),
> so I'd probably cherry-pick that one directly.
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
Do I need to submit this set of patches separately for each
architecture? Could it be merged at once, if necessary, I will
resubmit based on the latest mainline.
Thanks,
Tianjia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists