Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 00:17 +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > >>> Again, these new functions are copies of existing code with minor >>> modifications. I'd much rather see the existing code refactored and >>> then modified to handle the DOMAIN_FLAG_VIRTUAL_MACHINE case. >> >> Hey Mark, >> >> can your objections be fixed by follow-up patches bei Han or is >> anything critical in it? My AMD IOMMU patches for KVM support depend >> on these patches and everything they are changed I have to rebase by >> work. So I would prefer if Han can fix the issues found by follow-up >> patches :) > > Well, Weidong is going to have to rebase to dwmw2's tree anyway. I > assume he'll fix at least some of the issues in the process of doing > that. > > But you're right in that nothing I pointed out was a complete > showstopper, just ways in which things could be done more cleanly. >
Will Avi merge intel-iommu changes into his master tree? If yes, we can push my patches and Joerg's patches together. Otherwise, I need rebase my patches to dwmw2's tree and push it into there first. Regards, Weidong > Cheers, > Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
