On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 12:47:31PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > do not assume that all lapics in range 0..apic_id_limit > are valid and do not create Processor and Notify objects > for not possible lapics. > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
Any specific reason you split the Processor/Notify changes and the MADT/lapic entries into patches 5 and 6? Won't guests be confused if the Processor entries are missing but the lapic entries are still there? I wouldn't mind merging patches 4-6 into a single patch, just to avoid risking unnecessary bisectability issues. Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> -- Eduardo
