[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3a2bee8b-20b4-5d33-7d12-09c374a5afde@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 18:00:09 +0800
From: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <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, maz@...nel.org, james.morse@....com,
julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com, suzuki.poulose@....com,
christoffer.dall@....com, peterx@...hat.com, thuth@...hat.com,
chenhuacai@...il.com
Cc: 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 0/7] clean up redundant 'kvm_run' parameters
On 2020/6/23 17:42, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 27/04/20 06:35, 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.
>>
>> This series of patches has completely cleaned the architecture of
>> arm64, mips, ppc, and s390 (no such redundant code on x86). Due to
>> the large number of modified codes, a separate patch is made for each
>> platform. On the ppc platform, there is also a redundant structure
>> pointer of 'kvm_run' in 'vcpu_arch', which has also been cleaned
>> separately.
>
> Tianjia, can you please refresh the patches so that each architecture
> maintainer can pick them up? Thanks very much for this work!
>
> Paolo
>
No problem, this is what I should do.
After I update, do I submit separately for each architecture or submit
them together in a patchset?
Thanks,
Tianjia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists