From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Kurth Subject: Re: Xen 4.3 related documents - these need review and improvement in the coming weeks Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:41:55 +0100 Message-ID: <517F91E3.7070201@xen.org> References: <517EA910.70407@xen.org> <517F883C02000078000D1F24@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Reply-To: lars.kurth@xen.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <517F883C02000078000D1F24@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: Russell Pavlicek , "dietmar.hahn" , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 30/04/2013 08:00, Jan Beulich wrote: > I fixed what was obvious, but I wonder where the OVMF/Tianocore > line originates from: This was disabled in 4.2 (as it didn't build except > with one specific gcc version iirc), and I didn't see its state change > in -unstable. And in any event - afaict - this is at best experimental. > > Jan Thank you Jan. Looking at the logs this line came from Ian Campbell (added this to 4.2 on Sept 10 2012). I am happy to mark this as disabled (footnote [4]) and/or experimental. Any views? On 30/04/2013 09:02, Dietmar Hahn wrote: > The description for vPMU is stated with "Virtual Power Management Unit > for HVM guests". On xen-devel vPMU is normally meant to be "Virtual > Performance Monitoring Unit" > So what is meant here? > Dietmar. That is a good question. Again, looking at the logs, Ian Campbell added these in the same batch as the item above. Probably just a typo. Please somebody make a call and advise. I guess if it is Virtual Performance Monitoring Unit, this line should probably also go into the "Tooling" header Thanks for the review so far and spotting issues Lars