From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: "Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"Michael Roth" <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Anthony Liguori" <aliguori@amazon.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Should we have a 2.0-rc3 ?
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 06:51:33 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <534693D5.20603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FBBA28F-184E-45A4-A7B8-6F4ED4EFC205@suse.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1863 bytes --]
On 04/10/2014 06:46 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 10.04.2014, at 14:44, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 04/10/2014 05:17 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> So far I know of at least three fixes which should probably
>>> go into 2.0:
>>> * my fix for the configure stack-protector checks on MacOSX
>>> * MST's pull request updating the ACPI test blobs
>>> * MST says we need to update the hex files for ACPI too
>>> (otherwise you get a different ACPI blob depending on whether
>>> your build system had iasl or not, if I understand correctly)
>>>
>>> Are there any others?
>>
>> Yes. The libvirt team is a bit annoyed that the pci bus naming was
>> changed for PPC but not all architectures, but without a proper QMP
>> command to probe which naming scheme is in effect. We thought that the
>> naming scheme was going to be universally supplied for all arches, not
>> just PPC.
>>
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-04/msg01533.html
>>
>> Is this something that can be quickly fixed (perhaps by reverting the
>> PPC patch until a more complete solution is ready), and if so, is it
>> worth doing for 2.0 proper, rather than waiting for 2.0.1?
>
> Which way works better for you? I'd be perfectly fine with reverting the patch. Libvirt is the only reason that path is there in the first place.
Given the shortness of the timing, reverting for 2.0, and fixing it
properly after the release, may be the best path forward (that is, 2.0
will be no different than 1.7 for what libvirt has to special case,
whereas all future versions can be properly introspectable, so that
libvirt has less special casing than what it would need if 2.0 is a
one-off for PPC).
>
>
> Alex
>
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 604 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 12:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-10 11:17 [Qemu-devel] Should we have a 2.0-rc3 ? Peter Maydell
2014-04-10 11:24 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-10 11:49 ` Kevin Wolf
2014-04-10 12:44 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 12:46 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 12:51 ` Eric Blake [this message]
2014-04-10 12:56 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 13:41 ` Ján Tomko
2014-04-10 13:45 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:02 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 15:27 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:38 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 15:42 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-11 8:01 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-04-11 8:37 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2014-04-10 15:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-10 18:55 ` Cole Robinson
2014-04-10 21:30 ` Peter Maydell
2014-04-11 17:37 ` Peter Maydell
2014-04-11 22:55 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-12 1:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-04-12 8:48 ` Michael Tokarev
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=534693D5.20603@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).