Re: [GIT PULL] remove xend for 4.5 (Was: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Exclude xend from toolstack maintainers entry)

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

On 03/31/2014 01:16 PM, Matt Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 01:03:25PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 03/31/2014 12:56 PM, Matt Wilson wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:18:53PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 13:09 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> I don't really like adding more of 'xend has this' to the list,
>>>> that's ok.
>>>>
>>>>> but
>>>>> Jan discovered that 'xend' was using the group assigment hypercall for
>>>>> PCI devices while 'xl' is not doing that.
>>>>> That hypercall has certain benefits - you can use it to figure out if
>>>>> all of the PCI devices underneath a bridge are assigned to one
>>>>> guest and not shared amongts the guests.
>>>> I think this is at the wishlist rather than blocker end of the spectrum,
>>>> and probably falls under the general category of "xl pci passthrough has
>>>> sharp edges"? Does that sound right?
>>> Probably. There are other areas that are mightily sharp as well. They
>>> might not be blockers for the project to remove Xend code from the
>>> tree, but they'll be blockers for adoption of newer releases that
>>> don't include Xend.
>>>
>>> Another for the list is AER handling. That's only implemented in Xend
>>> now [1].
>> Well, given that AER was not mentioned 6 months ago when this came
>> up, it seems that keeping xend in tree is a blocker for people
>> actually asking for things to be added to xl.
> Actually, we discussed it on the phone [1]. Unfortunately I didn't
> complete my assigned action item to post on the list.

Ah, right. :-)

In any case, the relevant question isn't so much "Is this a blocker for 
xend removal", so much as "Is xl support for this a blocker for the 4.5 
release?"

  -George