From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: which branch of kvm.git should I do regular testing against? Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 12:28:49 +0300 Message-ID: <4FBDFF51.9030408@redhat.com> References: <1B4B44D9196EFF41AE41FDA404FC0A100D30F0@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: KVM , Marcelo Tosatti To: "Ren, Yongjie" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4697 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753756Ab2EXJ2x (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 May 2012 05:28:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1B4B44D9196EFF41AE41FDA404FC0A100D30F0@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/24/2012 12:24 PM, Ren, Yongjie wrote: > Hi Avi, > Our team spare some effort in regular nightly testing against KVM upstream. > We're using master branch now and all the test reports I sent out are based on master branch. > Which branch of kvm.git should we do regular testing against? > Your suggestion? kvm.git next. In theory kvm.git auto-next is even better, but we sometimes forget to update it. > > I know next branch contains latest KVM patches. > But I found some recent KVM patches in master branch never existed in next branch. > And, the next branch is based on linux3.4-rc3, while master branch is based on linux3.4-rc7. 'master' contains fixes, 'next' contains updates queued for the merge window. 'auto-next' should contain both, plus the latest upstream. > Another question is whether the patches in next branch will be finally merged into master branch? > During the merge window. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function