Fuad Tabba <[email protected]> writes: > > [...snip...] > >> > >> > Note sure if it's user error on my part, if I'm applying this to the >> > wrong base, but I found a build break here on patch 13: >> > kvm_gmem_invalidate_start() doesn't exist in the base tree. The >> > function is kvm_gmem_invalidate_begin() here. The rename >> > (190cc5370a8b6) landed via a different merge path and isn't an >> > ancestor of the stated base. >> > >> > Patches 19 and 20 have the same mismatch. Fix for all three is >> > s/kvm_gmem_invalidate_start/kvm_gmem_invalidate_begin/.
I took Sean's patches (off-list) and tried to combine it onto my existing state. (I'm using b4 [1] to manage these series and I didn't know I had to manually update the base-commit. Will try again next revision. [1] https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/ >> >> Ya, Ackerley used a slightly older kvm/next to send the patches. I at least >> was >> testing against kvm-x86/next, which does have the rename. >> >> Other than noting that this should be applied against the current kvm/next, I >> don't think there's anything else to be done? Should I base v9 on kvm/next, or kvm-x86/next? > > Agree. Sorry, didn't mean to be nit-picky, but this really threw me off :) > > Cheers, > /fuad
