From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: Request for input: Extended event channel support Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 10:20:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20130402142009.GF1754@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20130329130501.GA31497@phenom.dumpdata.com> <515AA88F02000078000C9FE3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <515AA88F02000078000C9FE3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org" , George Dunlap , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 08:44:47AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 29.03.13 at 14:05, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> * What we need to know > >> > >> What we're missing in order to make an informed decision is voices > >> from the community: If we delay the event channel scalability feature > >> until 4.4, how likely is this to be an issue? Are there current users > >> or potential users of Xen who need to be able to scale past 200 VMs on > >> a single host, and who would end up choosing another hypervisor if > >> this feature were delayed? > > > > For this to work you also need the Linux side patches. That means > > that if you want to hit this in v3.10 merge window you have until > > April 15th to get it in. The reason is that I am out from > > April 20th, and the merge window will probably be open on May 1st. > > I don't think upstream inclusion of the Linux side patches is a > requirement here. The patches need to exist (or else the code > can't be tested), but there's no need for them to be in 3.10 as > far as the interface selection if concerned. > OK.