On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:18 +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper,
> __kvm_s390_init(),
> and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
> bouncing through kvm_init(). Invoking kvm_arch_init() is the very
> first action
On 3/11/22 00:18, Sean Christopherson wrote:
Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper, __kvm_s390_init(),
and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
bouncing through kvm_init(). Invoking kvm_arch_init() is the very
first action performed by kvm_init(), i.e.
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 13:44:15 +0100
Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 23:18:52 +
> Sean Christopherson wrote:
>
> > Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper, __kvm_s390_init(),
> > and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
> > bouncing through
On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 23:18:52 +
Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper, __kvm_s390_init(),
> and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
> bouncing through kvm_init(). Invoking kvm_arch_init() is the very
> first action
Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper, __kvm_s390_init(),
and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
bouncing through kvm_init(). Invoking kvm_arch_init() is the very
first action performed by kvm_init(), i.e. this is a glorified nop.
Moving setup to
