From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerd Hoffmann Subject: Re: kexec trouble Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:23:36 +0100 Message-ID: <4576C458.40909@suse.de> References: <45758427.9010803@suse.de> <4575A46F.9090001@suse.de> <457683E2.6000205@suse.de> <45769BE8.90701@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Magnus Damm Cc: Magnus Damm , Xen devel list , Horms List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, >> For code which likely lives longer in the xen tree (especially >> kexec-generic.patch which has almost no chance to be accepted mainline >> as-is) it is a pain to deal with as patch. > > Yeah, I can agree with that. Feel free to add the files to sparse and > throw out the patch. The dependency on patches and other stuff may > make it difficult though. *Aaaaargh*, it's even messier than I thought. We have linux kernel source files which are modified by patches *AND* are in the sparse tree. And the two versions don't match of course. Looks like that is an older issue though, so I can't blame kexec for that one ;) These patches can't be removed cleanly after running mkbuildtree: x86-put-note-sections-into-a-pt_note-segment-in-vmlinux.patch smp-alts.patch net-gso-2-checksum-fix.patch net-gso-0-base.patch We *must* find a more sane way to maintain the linux kernel sources, this is one more reason why mixing sparse tree and patches isn't going to fly. As far I know at least the sparse tree is planned to be dropped, now with dom0 and xen being decoupled (3.0.3+) it should be possible without too much hassle. Any plans what to use instead? quilt patch queue? cheers, Gerd -- Gerd Hoffmann