From: Kir Kolyshkin <kir@openvz.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: devel@openvz.org, Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrey Savochkin <saw@sawoct.com>,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
mrmacman_g4@mac.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
frankeh@watson.ibm.com, serue@us.ibm.com,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>
Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: Which of the virtualization approaches is more suitable for kernel?
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:02:54 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43FDA46E.2000705@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1zmkjjty6.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>Back to the topic. If you (or somebody else) wants to see the real size of
>>things, take a look at broken-out patch set, available from
>>http://download.openvz.org/kernel/broken-out/. Here (2.6.15-025stab014.1 kernel)
>>we see that it all boils down to:
>
>
> Thanks. This is the first indication I have seen that you even have broken-out
> patches.
When Kirill Korovaev announced OpenVZ patch set on LKML (two times --
initially and for 2.6.15), he gave the links to the broken-out patch
set, both times.
> Why those aren't in your source rpms is beyond me.
That reflects our internal organization: we have a core virtualization
team which comes up with a core patch (combining all the stuff), and a
maintenance team which can add some extra patches (driver updates, some
bugfixes). So that extra patches comes up as a separate patches in
src.rpms, while virtualization stuff comes up as a single patch. That
way it is easier for our maintainters group.
Sure we understand this is not convenient for developers who want to
look at our code -- and thus we provide broken-out kernel patch sets
from time to time (not for every release, as it requires some effort
from Kirill, who is really buzy anyway). So, if you want this for a
specific kernel -- just ask.
I understand that this might look strange, but again, this reflects our
internal development structure.
> Everything
> seems to have been posted in a 2-3 day window at the end of January and the
> beginning of February. Is this something you are now providing?
Again, yes, occasionally from time to time, or upon request.
> Shakes head. You have a patch in broken-out that is 817K. Do you really
> maintain it this way as one giant patch?
In that version I took (025stab014) it was indeed as one big patch, and
I believe Kirill maintains it that way.
Previous kernel version (025stab012) was more fine-grained, take a look
at http://download.openvz.org/kernel/broken-out/2.6.15-025stab012.1
> Please let's not get side tracked playing whose patch is bigger.
Absolutely agree!
Regards,
Kir Kolyshkin, OpenVZ team.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-23 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-20 15:45 Which of the virtualization approaches is more suitable for kernel? Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-20 16:12 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-21 16:00 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-21 20:33 ` Sam Vilain
2006-02-21 23:50 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-22 10:09 ` [Devel] " Kir Kolyshkin
2006-02-22 15:26 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-23 12:02 ` Kir Kolyshkin [this message]
2006-02-23 13:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-23 14:00 ` Kir Kolyshkin
2006-02-24 21:44 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-24 23:01 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-27 17:42 ` Dave Hansen
2006-02-27 21:14 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-27 21:35 ` Dave Hansen
2006-02-27 21:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-04 3:17 ` sysctls inside containers Dave Hansen
2006-03-04 10:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-06 16:27 ` Dave Hansen
2006-03-06 17:08 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-03-06 17:18 ` Dave Hansen
2006-03-06 18:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-10 10:17 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-10 13:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-10 10:19 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-10 11:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-10 18:58 ` Dave Hansen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43FDA46E.2000705@openvz.org \
--to=kir@openvz.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=dev@sw.ru \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=frankeh@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=saw@sawoct.com \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox