* linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
@ 2017-06-09 4:28 Stephen Rothwell
2017-06-28 6:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-06-09 4:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Jones,
Claudio Imbrenda
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
between commit:
2387149eade2 ("KVM: improve arch vcpu request defining")
from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
8611a6a64661 ("KVM: s390: CMMA tracking, ESSA emulation, migration mode")
from the kvms390 tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 9c3bd94204ac,a8cafed79eb4..000000000000
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@@ -42,9 -42,11 +42,11 @@@
#define KVM_HALT_POLL_NS_DEFAULT 80000
/* s390-specific vcpu->requests bit members */
-#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS 8
-#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS 9
-#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC 10
-#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION 11
-#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION 12
+#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(0)
+#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(1)
+#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC KVM_ARCH_REQ(2)
++#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(3)
++#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(4)
#define SIGP_CTRL_C 0x80
#define SIGP_CTRL_SCN_MASK 0x3f
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
2017-06-09 4:28 linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-06-28 6:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-06-28 7:10 ` Christian Borntraeger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-06-28 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Jones,
Claudio Imbrenda, Marcelo Tosatti, Gleb Natapov, KVM
Hi all,
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 14:28:56 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 2387149eade2 ("KVM: improve arch vcpu request defining")
>
> from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
>
> 8611a6a64661 ("KVM: s390: CMMA tracking, ESSA emulation, migration mode")
>
> from the kvms390 tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 9c3bd94204ac,a8cafed79eb4..000000000000
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@@ -42,9 -42,11 +42,11 @@@
> #define KVM_HALT_POLL_NS_DEFAULT 80000
>
> /* s390-specific vcpu->requests bit members */
> -#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS 8
> -#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS 9
> -#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC 10
> -#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION 11
> -#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION 12
> +#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(0)
> +#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(1)
> +#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC KVM_ARCH_REQ(2)
> ++#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(3)
> ++#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(4)
>
> #define SIGP_CTRL_C 0x80
> #define SIGP_CTRL_SCN_MASK 0x3f
With the merge window appraoching, I assume that these 2 trees will
merge in the kvm tree soon. This is just a reminder that this conflict
still exists (I think).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
2017-06-28 6:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-06-28 7:10 ` Christian Borntraeger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2017-06-28 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Jones,
Claudio Imbrenda, Marcelo Tosatti, Gleb Natapov, KVM
On 06/28/2017 08:02 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 14:28:56 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> 2387149eade2 ("KVM: improve arch vcpu request defining")
>>
>> from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
>>
>> 8611a6a64661 ("KVM: s390: CMMA tracking, ESSA emulation, migration mode")
>>
>> from the kvms390 tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell
>>
>> diff --cc arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index 9c3bd94204ac,a8cafed79eb4..000000000000
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@@ -42,9 -42,11 +42,11 @@@
>> #define KVM_HALT_POLL_NS_DEFAULT 80000
>>
>> /* s390-specific vcpu->requests bit members */
>> -#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS 8
>> -#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS 9
>> -#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC 10
>> -#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION 11
>> -#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION 12
>> +#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(0)
>> +#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(1)
>> +#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC KVM_ARCH_REQ(2)
>> ++#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(3)
>> ++#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(4)
>>
>> #define SIGP_CTRL_C 0x80
>> #define SIGP_CTRL_SCN_MASK 0x3f
>
> With the merge window appraoching, I assume that these 2 trees will
> merge in the kvm tree soon. This is just a reminder that this conflict
> still exists (I think).
Yes, these 2 trees will be merged in the kvm tree and Paolo/Radim will resolve
the conflict.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
@ 2022-11-16 3:03 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2022-11-16 3:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Janosch Frank, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: Claudio Imbrenda, Gavin Shan, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List, Oliver Upton, Paolo Bonzini
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1274 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
between commit:
86bdf3ebcfe1 ("KVM: Support dirty ring in conjunction with bitmap")
from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
57ecc06995f9 ("KVM: s390: pv: add KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE")
from the kvms390 tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
index c87b5882d7ae,d3f86a280858..000000000000
--- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
@@@ -1178,7 -1178,7 +1178,8 @@@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt
#define KVM_CAP_S390_ZPCI_OP 221
#define KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY 222
#define KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL 223
-#define KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE 224
+#define KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_WITH_BITMAP 224
++#define KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE 225
#ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
2018-08-02 1:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2018-08-02 13:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2018-08-02 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck,
Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier, Martin Schwidefsky,
Heiko Carstens
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Radim Krčmář,
KVM, Dongjiu Geng, Janosch Frank
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 426 bytes --]
On 02/08/2018 03:19, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> -#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 156
>> +#define KVM_CAP_ARM_INJECT_SERROR_ESR 156
>> ++#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 157
>>
>> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
>>
> This is now a conflict between the s390 and kvm-arm trees.
This will shortly move to the KVM tree. The ARM capability will have to
be bumped again since x86 "won" number 157.
Thanks,
Paolo
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
2018-07-31 4:23 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2018-08-02 1:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-02 13:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-08-02 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall,
Marc Zyngier, Martin Schwidefsky, Heiko Carstens
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Paolo Bonzini, Radim Krčmář,
KVM, Dongjiu Geng, Janosch Frank
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1490 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 14:23:39 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>
> between commit:
>
> be26b3a73413 ("arm64: KVM: export the capability to set guest SError syndrome")
>
> from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
>
> a449938297e5 ("KVM: s390: Add huge page enablement control")
>
> from the kvms390 tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> index a7d9bc4e4068,b955b986b341..000000000000
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> @@@ -949,7 -949,7 +949,8 @@@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt
> #define KVM_CAP_GET_MSR_FEATURES 153
> #define KVM_CAP_HYPERV_EVENTFD 154
> #define KVM_CAP_HYPERV_TLBFLUSH 155
> -#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 156
> +#define KVM_CAP_ARM_INJECT_SERROR_ESR 156
> ++#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 157
>
> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
>
This is now a conflict between the s390 and kvm-arm trees.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
@ 2018-07-31 4:23 Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-02 1:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-07-31 4:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Paolo Bonzini, Radim Krčmář,
KVM, Dongjiu Geng, Janosch Frank
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1230 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
between commit:
be26b3a73413 ("arm64: KVM: export the capability to set guest SError syndrome")
from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
a449938297e5 ("KVM: s390: Add huge page enablement control")
from the kvms390 tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
index a7d9bc4e4068,b955b986b341..000000000000
--- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
@@@ -949,7 -949,7 +949,8 @@@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt
#define KVM_CAP_GET_MSR_FEATURES 153
#define KVM_CAP_HYPERV_EVENTFD 154
#define KVM_CAP_HYPERV_TLBFLUSH 155
-#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 156
+#define KVM_CAP_ARM_INJECT_SERROR_ESR 156
++#define KVM_CAP_S390_HPAGE_1M 157
#ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree
@ 2016-07-20 5:34 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-07-20 5:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck, Christoffer Dall, Marc Zyngier
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, David Hildenbrand, Andre Przywara
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
between commit:
2b8ddd9337ee ("KVM: Extend struct kvm_msi to hold a 32-bit device ID")
from the kvm-arm tree and commit:
6502a34cfd66 ("KVM: s390: allow user space to handle instr 0x0000")
from the kvms390 tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
index 84d9e5f8ab4b,70941f4ab6d8..000000000000
--- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
@@@ -867,7 -867,7 +867,8 @@@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info
#define KVM_CAP_VCPU_ATTRIBUTES 127
#define KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID 128
#define KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API 129
-#define KVM_CAP_S390_USER_INSTR0 130
+#define KVM_CAP_MSI_DEVID 130
++#define KVM_CAP_S390_USER_INSTR0 131
#ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-11-16 3:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-06-09 4:28 linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree Stephen Rothwell
2017-06-28 6:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-06-28 7:10 ` Christian Borntraeger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-11-16 3:03 Stephen Rothwell
2018-07-31 4:23 Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-02 1:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-02 13:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-20 5:34 Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).