From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH for 4.6 0/6] Prune legacy migration and move migration v2 out of daft status Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:26:19 +0100 Message-ID: <55AF7DDB.3060601@citrix.com> References: <1437388679-16468-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1437561186.12884.14.camel@citrix.com> <20150722112242.GA6831@zion.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150722112242.GA6831@zion.uk.xensource.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: Wei Liu , Ian Campbell Cc: Yang Hongyang , Ian Jackson , Wen Congyang , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 22/07/15 12:22, Wei Liu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:33:06AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Mon, 2015-07-20 at 11:37 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> This series is some cleanup following the integration of migration v2 >>> into the codebase. It removes the legacy migration implementation >>> (compatability is provided with the python conversion script), and >>> adjusts the migration v2 docs/implementation to no longer be >>> experimental. >> IMHO we should take this for 4.6, there is no point in shipping >> obsolete/unused code and leaving it there with the xc_domain_save name >> and the supported thing with a 2 suffix will only tempt people to >> continue to use or build on it. >> >> The only real risk here is breaking the build, since if it builds it >> will surely work. >> >> Wei, final call is yours. >> > Yes. I agree with you. But please do check this doesn't conflict with > COLOPre before applying. > > Wei. There are no conflicts I am aware of, having rebased this series myself. I will however put together a v2 series, covering the two comments from review here. ~Andrew