On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 06:05:10PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/20/2010 07:02 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
This cleans up msix/kvm integration a bit. The really important patch is
the
last one, which allows msix.o to be
On 10/06/2010 11:39 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 06:05:10PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/20/2010 07:02 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
This cleans up msix/kvm integration a bit. The really important
On 09/20/2010 07:02 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
This cleans up msix/kvm integration a bit. The really important patch is the
last one, which allows msix.o to be part of non-target-specific build.
I actually thoought this later
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 06:05:10PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/20/2010 07:02 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
This cleans up msix/kvm integration a bit. The really important patch is
the
last one, which allows msix.o to be
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
This cleans up msix/kvm integration a bit. The really important patch is the
last one, which allows msix.o to be part of non-target-specific build.
I actually thoought this later move should be done in a different way:
- add all