Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes:

> On 20/07/2016 07:46, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
>> 
>> Or do you want me to merge this before Paul gets back?
>
> No, this should be merged through the KVM tree.  Please Cc the KVM
> maintainers before offering to apply a patch that formally belongs to
> another tree.

Yeah OK. It was just an offer, because I know the Qemu side is blocked
until this goes in.

> In particular this patch would indeed have a conflict, because you have
>
> +#define KVM_CAP_PPC_HTM 129
>
> but cap numbers 129 and 130 are already taken.  So whoever applies it
> should bump the number to 131.

Yep, I know about KVM caps, I probably would have remembered to check
the KVM tree. At the very least it would have got caught in linux-next.

cheers

Reply via email to