On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 11:42:15AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 October 2015 at 17:33, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 06:18:51PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24/09/2015 15:20, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> > From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com>
> >> >
> >> > Quote from Michael:
> >> >
> >> > We really should rename VHOST_RESET_OWNER to VHOST_RESET_DEVICE.
> >>
> >> Where is the corresponding Linux patch for this?
> >>
> >> I would like to fetch the updated headers for KVM, and this is breaking
> >> it. In fact, a patch that just renames the #define (without providing
> >> the old name for backwards compatibility) would be NACKed in upstream
> >> Linux.
> >>
> >> Paolo
> >
> > Right. And it turns out this whole approach is wrong. I intend to
> > revert this patch, and also drop the patch sending VHOST_RESET_OWNER on
> > device stop.
>
> This revert doesn't seem to have happened, I think, which means
> that this is one of the things which prevents a clean header-update
> against kvm/next. Could we get this fixed for rc0, please?
My bad. I will fix it next week. What's the deadline for rc0 then?
BTW, as Michael stated, a simple revert is not enough.
--yliu
