On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 06:20:01PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 18:01, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 04:56:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 16:06, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Hi. This header sync doesn't look like it was a proper > > > sync made with the update-headers script against some > > > upstream kernel -- at least the commit message doesn't > > > say what the sync was against and the fact that it only > > > changes the virtio-pmem headers looks suspicious. > > > > > > Can you respin with a proper header sync against upstream > > > mainline, please? > > > This isn't from mainline. We have a bit of a deadlock with linux merge > > window opening soon. I think it's reasonable temporarily > > and then before release either virtio-pmem gets there or I will > > revert it and drop the header. > > It's definitely not ideal: until the headers are actually > upstream there's no guarantee that they won't change ABI.
But then I'm watching it, if I see that I'll drop the device from qemu for now. > Are the headers at least in some kvm-next or equivalent tree ? Yes - libnvdimm maintainer's tree. > When are they expected to hit mainline? Next merge window. > > thanks > -- PMM
