Xen devel - Feb 2013 - RE: linux-next: build failure after merge of the xen-two tree

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 16, 2013 01:52:00 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Rafael,
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:53:34 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki"
<rjw@sisk.pl>
>> wrote: 
>>> 
>>> On Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:50:14 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:26:24 -0500 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>>>> <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you. I keep on forgetting - but would it be OK for me
to
>>>>> take this patch in my tree? Or should I not since this is a
new
>>>>> functionality that Rafael is going to introduce in v3.9?
>>>> 
>>>> It is an API change in the pm tree that is not yet in
Linus'' tree.
>>>> 
>>>>> And if so, perhaps I should tack it on in my tree, once
Rafael
>>>>> does a git pull to Linus? Or just point Linus to this git
commit?
>>>> 
>>>> You should point Linus at this patch if the pm tree is merged
>>>> first, or 
>>>> Rafael should do the same if the reverse happens.
>>> 
>>> Alternatively, Konrad can pull the acpi-scan branch containing the
>>> changes in question from my tree into his tree and rebase the new
>>> material on top of that.
>> 
>> Or pull the acpi-scan branch into his tree and use my conflict
>> resolution in the resulting merge thus requiring no rebasing. 
>> However, Linus likes to see such interactions, so it can be left up
>> to when the latter of the two tress is merged by Linus.
> 
> Well, I''m afraid this won''t be sufficient this time,
because of this
> commit in my tree (which is not on the acpi-scan branch):
> 
> commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b
> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> Date:   Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100
> 
>     ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks
> 
> after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be run under
> acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well).
Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side, will send out 2
xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding lock.

Thanks,
Jinsong
> 
> Moreover, I think that the introduction of ACPI-based CPU hotplug
> into Xen and this point would be premature, because we need to rework
> the original ACPI-based CPU hotplug and quite frankly it shouldn''t
> call acpi_bus_scan() directly at all.
> 
> Konrad?
> 
> Thanks,
> Rafael

On Sunday, February 17, 2013 07:31:37 AM Liu, Jinsong
wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 16, 2013 01:52:00 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi Rafael,
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> >> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:53:34 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki"
<rjw@sisk.pl>
> >> wrote: 
> >>> 
> >>> On Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:50:14 AM Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:26:24 -0500 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> >>>> <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Thank you. I keep on forgetting - but would it be OK
for me to
> >>>>> take this patch in my tree? Or should I not since this
is a new
> >>>>> functionality that Rafael is going to introduce in
v3.9?
> >>>> 
> >>>> It is an API change in the pm tree that is not yet in
Linus'' tree.
> >>>> 
> >>>>> And if so, perhaps I should tack it on in my tree,
once Rafael
> >>>>> does a git pull to Linus? Or just point Linus to this
git commit?
> >>>> 
> >>>> You should point Linus at this patch if the pm tree is
merged
> >>>> first, or 
> >>>> Rafael should do the same if the reverse happens.
> >>> 
> >>> Alternatively, Konrad can pull the acpi-scan branch containing
the
> >>> changes in question from my tree into his tree and rebase the
new
> >>> material on top of that.
> >> 
> >> Or pull the acpi-scan branch into his tree and use my conflict
> >> resolution in the resulting merge thus requiring no rebasing. 
> >> However, Linus likes to see such interactions, so it can be left
up
> >> to when the latter of the two tress is merged by Linus.
> > 
> > Well, I''m afraid this won''t be sufficient this time,
because of this
> > commit in my tree (which is not on the acpi-scan branch):
> > 
> > commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b
> > Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > Date:   Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100
> > 
> >     ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks
> > 
> > after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be run under
> > acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well).
> 
> Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side, will send out
> 2 xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding lock.
Thanks, but those new changes will only make sense after merging the Xen tree
with the PM tree.  Why don''t we queue them up for merging later after
both
the Xen and PM trees have been pulled from?

Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

> > > commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b
> > > Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > Date:   Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100
> > > 
> > >     ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks
> > > 
> > > after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be run
under
> > > acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well).
> > 
> > Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side, will
send out
> > 2 xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding lock.
> 
> Thanks, but those new changes will only make sense after merging the Xen
tree
> with the PM tree.  Why don''t we queue them up for merging later
after both
> the Xen and PM trees have been pulled from?
OK, I''ve created a branch
(http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next-resolved)
that has your branch and my branch - along with the fix from Stephan and then
the three updates from Jinsong. Jinsong, please check that I''ve got all
the
right patches. I will rebase it once Linus has merged both of the Xen and PM
trees.

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 03:49:41 PM Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
wrote:
> > > > commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b
> > > > Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > Date:   Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100
> > > > 
> > > >     ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks
> > > > 
> > > > after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be
run under
> > > > acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well).
> > > 
> > > Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side,
will send out
> > > 2 xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding lock.
> > 
> > Thanks, but those new changes will only make sense after merging the
Xen tree
> > with the PM tree.  Why don''t we queue them up for merging
later after both
> > the Xen and PM trees have been pulled from?
> 
> OK, I''ve created a branch
(http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next-resolved)
> that has your branch and my branch - along with the fix from Stephan and
then
> the three updates from Jinsong. Jinsong, please check that I''ve
got all the
> right patches. I will rebase it once Linus has merged both of the Xen and
PM trees.
Thanks, this looks good.

Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>> commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b
>>>> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>> Date:   Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100
>>>> 
>>>>     ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks
>>>> 
>>>> after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be run
>>>> under acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well).
>>> 
>>> Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side, will
>>> send out 2 xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding
>>> lock. 
>> 
>> Thanks, but those new changes will only make sense after merging the
>> Xen tree with the PM tree.  Why don''t we queue them up for
merging
>> later after both the Xen and PM trees have been pulled from?
> 
> OK, I''ve created a branch
>
(http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next-resolved)
> that has your branch and my branch - along with the fix from Stephan
> and then  
> the three updates from Jinsong. Jinsong, please check that I''ve
got
> all the 
> right patches. I will rebase it once Linus has merged both of the Xen
> and PM trees. 
Check done, it''s OK.

Thanks,
Jinsong--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html