Xen devel - Oct 2010 - xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

Hi Stefano,

[just casting the net a bit wider ...]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini at
eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>
> I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Stephen,
> > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > 
> > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > xen: initial domain support
> > 
> > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for
this
> > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > 
> > Could you please pull:
> > 
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
linux-next-initial-domain-v4
> > 
> > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged
on
> > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change the
> > branch somehow.
Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive
reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,

I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
community.

Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot
use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some
other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's version.

Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).

Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus
during the next merge window.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr at canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/attachments/20101020/1ce82a01/attachment-0001.pgp

[re-casting the net narrower for this specific reply, don''t
reply-all to this if you prefer the wider net]

Note that Chris Wright (and virtualization@lists.osdl.org) are
still listed as a maintainer (and as a list) for "XEN HYPERVISOR
INTERFACE" in the latest kernel MAINTAINERS file.  As a
result, sfr included them on his "request for positive
reply" list in the below message.

Jeremy, as the "other" maintainer, perhaps you should
submit a patch in the 2.6.37 window to fix this (and
also your email address)?  And should xen-devel@lists.xen.org
be the correct email for the remaining list (even though
xensource.com still works)?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@canb.auug.org.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:33 PM
> To: Stefano Stabellini
> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; Jeremy Fitzhardinge; Konrad
> Rzeszutek Wilk; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Chris Wright;
> virtualization@lists.osdl.org; linux-next@vger.kernel.org; Andrew
> Morton
> Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in
> linux-next
> 
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > >
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > >
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since
several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad''s xen-pcifront
series and for
> this
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > >
> > > Could you please pull:
> > >
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-
> next-initial-domain-v4
> > >
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad''s pcifront
series merged
> on
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
> the
> > > branch somehow.
> 
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> positive
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 
> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> community.
> 
> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
> cannot
> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
> some
> other stable tree (almost always Linus'' tree).  linux-next is
rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day''s
> version.
> 
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> 
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to
> Linus
> during the next merge window.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> positive reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
I am not officially listed as a maintainer for Xen, but fwiw:

Acked-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer at oracle.com>

And, Stephen, I think Chris Wright and virtualization at lists.osdl.org
are stale entries in the MAINTAINERS file for Xen development,
so you are unlikely to receive replies from him/them.
(Chris, virtualization at lists.osdl.org ... please feel free
to correct me if I am wrong.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr at canb.auug.org.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:33 PM
> To: Stefano Stabellini
> Cc: xen-devel at lists.xensource.com; Jeremy Fitzhardinge; Konrad
> Rzeszutek Wilk; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; Chris Wright;
> virtualization at lists.osdl.org; linux-next at vger.kernel.org; Andrew
> Morton
> Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in
> linux-next
> 
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > >
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > >
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since
several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series
and for
> this
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > >
> > > Could you please pull:
> > >
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-
> next-initial-domain-v4
> > >
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series
merged
> on
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
> the
> > > branch somehow.
> 
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> positive
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 
> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> community.
> 
> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
> cannot
> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
> some
> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
> version.
> 
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> 
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to
> Linus
> during the next merge window.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr at canb.auug.org.au
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
<stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> > 
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > > 
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > > 
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since
several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series
and for this
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > > 
> > > Could you please pull:
> > > 
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
linux-next-initial-domain-v4
> > > 
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series
merged on
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
the
> > > branch somehow.
> 
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 
Sure.
Jeremy?

> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> community.
> 
Thank you very much for understanding!

> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot
> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some
> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
version.
> 
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> 
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus
> during the next merge window.
 
All right.
I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
of the result.
Please checkout this branch:

git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5

and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
conflicts.

Cheers,

Stefano