From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753531AbcFPIIJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2016 04:08:09 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:36568 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902AbcFPIIC (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2016 04:08:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: do not use kvm->online_vcpus to check "has one VCPU been created?" To: Christian Borntraeger , Cornelia Huck References: <1465824332-10628-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20160613164421.77b70bee.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> <26948b73-1233-8515-24ac-7557837230b2@redhat.com> <5762559A.1090604@de.ibm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christian Borntraeger From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:07:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5762559A.1090604@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 16/06/2016 09:30, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 06/16/2016 12:00 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 13/06/2016 16:44, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>>>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 10 +++++----- >>>>> arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig | 1 - >>>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 11 +++-------- >>>>> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 14 ++++++++------ >>>>> virt/kvm/Kconfig | 3 --- >>>>> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++---------- >>>>> 6 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) >>>>> >>> Looks like a sane approach, only two inversions in the s390 patch :) >> >> So it's okay to push patch 3 to kvm/next? > > > With the 2 fixes that Conny requested, yes. > > With that fixed up, > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger Yes, of course. Pushed, thanks! Paolo