From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXtwW-0005yX-VY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:30:25 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXtwV-0005y7-Bi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:30:24 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34703 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXtwV-0005y4-90 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:30:23 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:59705) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KXtwU-0003Jn-Hs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:30:23 -0400 Message-ID: <48B3BE88.8090003@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:27:52 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenner: add event channel implementation. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Keir Fraser wrote: > We'll certainly be sync'ing with upstream qemu now, yes. I'm not sure what > Ian Jackson's plans are with regard to Gerd's patches. I think he was hoping > that Gerd would post patches to xen-devel against his tree (being an > existing and actively maintained and tested Xen patchset) and then we would > from there submit to upstream. There are two patchsets out there: #1 for upstream qemu: http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/patches/qemu-upstream/ #2 for qemu-xen: http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/patches/qemu-xen/ The patchsets are largely identical, thats why I don't post both. I usually post only the upstream version and include a pointer to the qemu-xen patches in the intro text for the patchset. Differences come (a) from the fact that qemu-xen is old (these should go away once Ian synced with upstream) and (b) the slightly different ordering to make the qemu-xen patchset bisection-friendly. > Afaics there's some workflow or patchflow to > be worked out here: Workflow could look like this: (1) Ian merges upstream into qemu-xen. (2) I'll rebase my patches to the resulting tree. (3) Merge both patchsets, into the trees. That should result in almost identical hw/xen* files in both trees, so we don't end up with a big mess when Ian merges again. > I can't see why we would take Gerd's patches wholesale > when we have a working patchset already. Which patchset you are refering to? As far I know Ian & Samuel are focusing on getting the changes to generic qemu code upstream (such as serial and ide fixes which ran over the qemu-devel list already), not on the xen support bits. cheers, Gerd