On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 03/06/2014 13:29, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto: > > > It's really not your fault, there's not much you can do given the hardware > > > architecture. But I don't think this code can be accepted upstream, > > > sorry. > > > > Yeah, the code is not nice and it is not Tiejun's fault. > > > > Is there any way at all he could change the patch series to make it more > > appealing to you? Or maybe we could having more clearly separated from > > the rest of the codebase? > > I don't know, perhaps a new "-M pc-xen-igd-passthrough" machine type based on > what you're using now (pc-1.6?) but with all the required hacks?
That might be a good compromise as it would make it easier to identify regressions caused by these changes. I would be happy with that.
