Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with Linus' tree

From: Paolo Bonzini <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:35:29 +0100

On 29/01/2018 05:02, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:53:26 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:23:17 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <[email-masked]> wrote:  
>>>> No. Keep it and lets next time coordinate the relevant bits and pieces
>>>> better. I reserve that bit 20 and let Linus sort out the trivial conflict
>>>> when merging the stuff.  
>>>
>>> I just picked that bit 20 when resolving the conflict.  The original patch used
>>> bit 11, so the resolution could use any other sensible bit.  
>>
>> 20 is fine :)
> 
> So maybe this (X86_FEATURE_SEV) should be fixed up to use "( 7*32+20)" in
> the kvm tree?  (Just a followup patch changing the value/position in the
> file would be fine).

Yes, we'll fix this and the other conflicts with Linus's tree before
sending out the pull request.

Paolo