[PATCH 00/15] arm64/kvm: use common sysreg definitions

[Christoffer Dall]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 07:48:28PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:35:13PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 06:35:55PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 08:17:22AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > 
> > > > The next question is how do we merge this. Obviously, we can't split it
> > > > between trees, and this is very likely to clash with anything that we
> > > > will merge on the KVM side (the sysreg table is a popular place).
> > > > 
> > > > Will, Catalin: Would it make sense to create a stable branch with these
> > > > patches, and merge it into both the arm64 and KVM trees? That'd make
> > > > things easier...
> > > 
> > > I think the scope for conflict on our side is pretty high too, so a shared
> > > branch might be the best way to go. I don't want to branch just yet though,
> > > so I'll probably wait a week or so before setting something in stone.
> > 
> > Any further thoughts on this?
> > 
> > Christoffer has Acked the KVM bits, so if you're happy to do so for the
> > arm64 bits I can make a stable branch.
> 
> Looking around, it doesn't look like there's anything outside of arm64
> that'll conflict on the <asm/sysreg.h> changes, and git's happy to merge
> my changes with Suzuki's changes currently queued in arm64's
> for-next/core branch.
> 
> I think it would make sense for those to be in a common branch taken by
> both the arm64 and KVM trees, with the KVM-specific parts being taken by
> KVM alone atop of that.
> 
> Would everyone be happy with that?

I'm happy with that.

> 
> For reference, I've updated my branches so that arm64/common-sysreg only
> contains the common parts, with the KVM parts atop of that in
> kvm/common-sysreg.
> 

Will, Catalin:  Let me know if you're going to pull from common-sysreg
and I'll do the same and add the kvm patches above.

Thanks for preparing the patches.
-Christoffer