From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXh1V-0001oj-TI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:42:41 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXh1S-0001nT-7L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:42:41 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59589 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXh1R-0001nM-Vu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:42:38 -0400 Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:27458) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KXh1S-00080q-4A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:42:38 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:42:36 +0100 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenner: add event channel implementation. From: Keir Fraser Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <48B2F27B.5010200@codemonkey.ws> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" 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: Anthony Liguori Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Gerd Hoffmann , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 25/8/08 18:57, "Anthony Liguori" wrote: > Keir Fraser wrote: >> On 25/8/08 15:15, "Anthony Liguori" wrote: >> >> With regard to this Xenner patch series, I don't think we have a strong >> opinion. The changes are not particularly relevant to us. As long as the >> orthogonal qemu-on-xen modes that we *do* care about can coexist happily >> alongside, we'll be happy. > > Sorry, I was actually referring to the other qemu-dm PV domain support > patch series. That's the one that I'm looking for input from ya'll on. > Now that 3.3.0 has been released, it should be possible for you guys to > consider merging the patches into qemu-dm, right? 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. Afaics there's some workflow or patchflow to be worked out here: I can't see why we would take Gerd's patches wholesale when we have a working patchset already. It's a bank holiday here in the UK today, but I expect Ian will give you his opinion tomorrow! -- Keir