From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olaf Hering Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu-xen-traditional 1/2] xen_platform: unplug also SCSI disks [and 1 more messages] Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 18:14:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20170131171417.GB20351@aepfle.de> References: <20161124201130.16558-1-olaf@aepfle.de> <20161124201130.16558-3-olaf@aepfle.de> <20161124201130.16558-2-olaf@aepfle.de> <22643.40798.969287.384827@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <20170109163907.GA14471@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6673552135115065265==" Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cYc0g-0008C8-B1 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:14:26 +0000 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Sender: "Xen-devel" To: George Dunlap Cc: xen-devel , Ian Jackson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============6673552135115065265== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GID0FwUMdk1T2AWN" Content-Disposition: inline --GID0FwUMdk1T2AWN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Jan 10, George Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Olaf Hering wrote: > > The protocol was introduced before upstream had one, xen-3.0 vs. > > xen-3.x. I have not digged into 10 year old emails why it was done that > > way, if it was ever proposed for upstream inclusion. Meanwhile the > > upstream unplug is used since a two years. This patch would allow to run > > old SUSE domUs on new non-SUSE dom0s with qemu-trad. > Given that SuSE kernels are now using the new unplug protocol, I think > there's no longer any reason to stand on principle. We take a > practical approach for emulating other hypervisor interfaces (Hyper-V > and VMWare); making accomodation for "one of our own" seems pretty > reasonable. (I haven't reviewed the patch itself.) So what should be done with the two patches? Are they acceptable for staging, or will they be rejected? Olaf --GID0FwUMdk1T2AWN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQSkRyP6Rn//f03pRUBdQqD6ppg2fgUCWJDF5QAKCRBdQqD6ppg2 fgfmAKC2vSzgpJHsUO6Gpg78QvMXrA6R4QCgyFPHb+ckTo3me6yfgwiQfDG0RqE= =HXIx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GID0FwUMdk1T2AWN-- --===============6673552135115065265== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVuLm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLnhlbi5v cmcveGVuLWRldmVsCg== --===============6673552135115065265==--