Xen devel - Jan 2011 - Xen watchdog patch disposition?

Jeremy,

while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next, would get
pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge window
was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with whatever
other changes you intend to push for .39?

Thanks, Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:50:51PM +0000, Jan Beulich
wrote:
> Jeremy,
> 
> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next, would get
> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge window
> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
> inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with whatever
Why would it be inappropiate? It looks as if the maintainer
for the watchdog subsystems is linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org 

Are they not responding to the patch?
> other changes you intend to push for .39?
> 
> Thanks, Jan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

>>> On 27.01.11 at 15:50, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:50:51PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>> 
>> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next, would get
>> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge
window
>> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
>> inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with whatever
> 
> Why would it be inappropiate? It looks as if the maintainer
> for the watchdog subsystems is linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org 
> 
> Are they not responding to the patch?
Indeed, that''s what is(n''t) happening.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 15:09 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.01.11 at 15:50, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:50:51PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Jeremy,
> >> 
> >> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next,
would get
> >> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge
window
> >> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
> >> inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with
whatever
> > 
> > Why would it be inappropiate? It looks as if the maintainer
> > for the watchdog subsystems is linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org 
> > 
> > Are they not responding to the patch?
> 
> Indeed, that''s what is(n''t) happening.
Did you send it again after the first time back in October? Sometimes
maintainers drop things by mistake and need reminding...

You can add my
Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
on the Xen aspects of the patch in
<4CA9BC76020000780001A56B@vpn.id2.novell.com> if that helps.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 03:09:22PM +0000, Jan Beulich
wrote:
> >>> On 27.01.11 at 15:50, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:50:51PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Jeremy,
> >> 
> >> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next,
would get
> >> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge
window
> >> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
> >> inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with
whatever
> > 
> > Why would it be inappropiate? It looks as if the maintainer
> > for the watchdog subsystems is linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org 
> > 
> > Are they not responding to the patch?
> 
> Indeed, that''s what is(n''t) happening.
Grrrrrrr.. Can you repost it once more please? I don''t remember
it at all and I wouldn''t mind taking a look at it again.

If it does not bite through the linux-watchdog mailing list I can
take it under my wing and try to shepard it through the process.

Thank you for bringing this up - I completly forgot about the
patchset.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

>>> On 27.01.11 at 16:40, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> Grrrrrrr.. Can you repost it once more please?
Done so a few moments ago.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On 01/27/2011 06:50 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:50:51PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>>
>> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next, would get
>> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge
window
>> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
>> inappropriate, so can I hope that you will include this with whatever
> Why would it be inappropiate? It looks as if the maintainer
> for the watchdog subsystems is linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org 
>
> Are they not responding to the patch?
AKPM is also generally the maintainer of last resort for these kinds of
little subsystems if there''s no formal maintainer (or the listed
maintainer is non-responsive).

    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On 01/27/2011 04:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> while originally I had hoped this patch, sitting in xen/next, would get
> pushed for .37, that didn''t happen and now the .38 merge window
> was missed too. Trying to get this to Linux on my own seems
> inappropriate,
It''s perfectly appropriate.  I can Ack it if that makes you feel
better.

If it were more core Xen code I''d want to be more involved in it, but
the "Xen implementation of some subsystem driver" is pretty fair game
for anyone.  For example, I''d have no objections to someone posting
pv(scsi|usb) front/backends as an independent effort (at least in
principle; in practice I might have objections to the patch contents
themselves).

    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel