From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KQiU4-0008Fk-Gn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:51:20 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KQiU2-0008Bs-QM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:51:19 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47040 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KQiU2-0008Bf-Gc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:51:18 -0400
Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:32515)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <samuel.thibault@labri.fr>) id 1KQiU1-00043y-6c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:51:18 -0400
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:50:55 +0100
From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] merge some xen bits into
	qemu
Message-ID: <20080806125055.GG4448@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
References: <48973F8E.8080109@codemonkey.ws>
	<20080805104630.GM4478@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
	<489835A3.6030804@redhat.com>
	<20080805112935.GO4478@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
	<48985336.2020709@redhat.com>
	<20080805150328.GT4478@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
	<20080805154140.GV4478@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
	<48997981.1030703@redhat.com>
	<20080806102338.GA4448@implementation.uk.xensource.com>
	<m37iauxqii.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <m37iauxqii.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Markus Armbruster, le Wed 06 Aug 2008 08:43:49 -0400, a écrit :
> It *is* quite move, becauses it accomplishes a lot: it goes from a
> heavily modified fork of an oldish version all the way to merge with
> upstream, as far as PV is concerned.

Then why doing it in qemu before having it tested in the xen unstable
tree?  That's not the way I usually see merging happen.

> For what it's worth, I went over significant parts of Gerd's patch
> (all the generic stuff + pvfb) with a fine comb, comparing it to what
> we have now.  I consider it sound.

I'm not saying it's not fine.  I had a look and the code looked fine
indeed.  But what I'm afraid of is the delta with Ian would have to
bear when merging: is it save/restore safe, does it work with PCI
pass-through, VT-D, etc.?

> If that's where we want to go, we can of course still argue whether we
> should go in leaps or baby steps, and whether Gerd's leap lands in
> quite the right spot.

Baby steps are much easier to review.  That's how things are usually
done, and here it looks to me like it is feasible to achieve in Xen (and
have it tested) before event thinking about importing a pile of code in
qemu where it won't receive as much testing as the xen-unstable tree
receives.

Samuel