On 08/07/2013 06:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 08:50:12PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:15:21PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:

quoted

On 08/07/2013 10:18 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

quoted

quoted

Please let me know, if I should rebase again.

tip:master is not a stable branch; it is more like linux-next.  We need
to figure out which topic branches are dependencies for this set.

Okay. I 'll start looking at the branches that would get affected.
(Xen, kvm are obvious ones).
Please do let me know the branches I might have to check for.

quoted

From the Xen standpoint anything past v3.11-rc4 would work.

For KVM as early as past v3.11-rc1 would be OK.

I'm still completely confused as to the base of this patchset.  The
first patch has the following hunk for arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h:

--- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h
+++ arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h

@@ -718,7 +718,7 @@
        PVOP_VCALLEE2(pv_lock_ops.lock_spinning, lock, ticket);
 }

-static __always_inline void ____ticket_unlock_kick(struct arch_spinlock

*lock,
+static __always_inline void __ticket_unlock_kick(struct arch_spinlock
*lock,
                                                        __ticket_t ticket)
 {
        PVOP_VCALL2(pv_lock_ops.unlock_kick, lock, ticket);


However, there is no ticket_unlock_kick in paravirt.h in either
tip:master nor in linus...

	-hpa