On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 10:24:01PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > config HAVE_SETUP_PER_CPU_AREA
> > def_bool X86_64
> >
> > -select HAVE_KVM
> > +config HAVE_KVM
> > + def_bool y
>
> i think it might be better to just move the select to aft
Hi Dave.
>
> I've verified that arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig was getting run by putting some
> comments in it. It seems to me like just putting:
>
> config HAVE_KVM
> bool
>
> isn't letting anything come into my .config at all. I'm not sure why we
> do that, and then have:
>
>
Hi Rusty.
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 11:06:51PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 11:18 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > The whole drivers/kvm/ thing was just a trick to get merged quickly. I
> > think the new layout should be something like
> >
> > virt/kvm/, include/linux/kvm*.h -
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:47:39AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> KVM is due to receive support for multiple architectures (ppc, ia64, and
> s390, in addition to the existing x86), hopefully in time for the 2.6.25
> merge window. It is awkward to place the new arch support in
> drivers/kvm/, so I'd
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 06:15:40PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:47:39AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >>KVM is due to receive support for multiple architectures (ppc, ia64, and
> >>s390, in addition to the existin
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 01:05:05PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> The second 2.6.25 kvm patch series, for your review. Three more to go.
Hi Avi.
A diffstat in your introduction mail would be nice so one does not
have to check 50+ patches to see if it touches any file I can give
feedback on.
On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 05:35:47PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Currently, make headers_check barfs due to , which
> includes, not existing. Rather than add a zillion s, export kvm.h
> only if the arch actually supports it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> arch/x86/Kconfi
