[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86bjm0wcag.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 15:37:59 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Sascha Bischoff <Sascha.Bischoff@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
nd <nd@....com>,
"oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <Joey.Gouly@....com>,
Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>,
"yuzenghui@...wei.com" <yuzenghui@...wei.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Aishwarya.TCV@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: gic-v3: Only set ICH_HCR traps for v2-on-v3 or v3 guests
On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 15:00:30 +0100,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 08:50:22AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> The only thing I can think of is that you are objecting to the idea of
> having the KVM arm64 tree merge it's fixes branch into it's development
> branch. That is not what I am suggesting, I am suggesting putting the
> fixes branch itself directly into -next to be merged by Stephen. I am
> not proposing any change to the content of the KVM arm64 branches.
Then I don't know why you even involve me here.
You can pull anything you want in -next, and you don't need my
approval for it. I still don't think this is a good idea because the
life cycles are totally different, but if you like making your own
life complicated, go ahead, I'm not going to stop you.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists