From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: paravirt_ops queue rebased Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 23:49:40 +0200 Message-ID: <200705062349.40343.ak@suse.de> References: <463E0E8D.3050806@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <463E0E8D.3050806@goop.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: James Bottomley , Virtualization Mailing List List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Sunday 06 May 2007 19:21:17 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > I just rebased my paravirt_ops patch queue to current git. Looks like > almost all the pre-req patches are now in, which is nice. > > The only missing thing from your patches was you sched_clock patches and > the sched_clock paravirt-op. Are there still problems with either your > sched_clock patch There were problems with my patch and yours dependend on it so I deferred both. > or the paravirt patch? Should I resubmit the > paravirt-sched_clock patch based on git? Not needed, I still have it. > The only other general patches before the Xen series I have left in my > queue are: > > i386-common-smp.patch > i386-fix-voyager-build.patch > vsyscall-note-use-elfnote_h.patch > > I obviously don't depend the voyager patch, but I tweaked it a bit to > apply to the current git tree. > > How is your patch queue looking now? Is there much left? Only a few patches left, like unwinder, vDSO, sched-clock. -Andi