Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1976 bytes --]

Hi Stefano,

[just casting the net a bit wider ...]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>
> I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Stephen,
> > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > 
> > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > xen: initial domain support
> > 
> > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for this
> > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > 
> > Could you please pull:
> > 
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next-initial-domain-v4
> > 
> > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged on
> > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change the
> > branch somehow.

Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive
reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,

I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
community.

Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot
use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some
other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's version.

Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).

Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus
during the next merge window.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Dan Magenheimer]

> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> positive reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,

I am not officially listed as a maintainer for Xen, but fwiw:

Acked-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>

And, Stephen, I think Chris Wright and virtualization@lists.osdl.org
are stale entries in the MAINTAINERS file for Xen development,
so you are unlikely to receive replies from him/them.
(Chris, virtualization@lists.osdl.org ... please feel free
to correct me if I am wrong.)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@canb.auug.org.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:33 PM
> To: Stefano Stabellini
> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; Jeremy Fitzhardinge; Konrad
> Rzeszutek Wilk; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Chris Wright;
> virtualization@lists.osdl.org; linux-next@vger.kernel.org; Andrew
> Morton
> Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in
> linux-next
> 
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > >
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > >
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for
> this
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > >
> > > Could you please pull:
> > >
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-
> next-initial-domain-v4
> > >
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged
> on
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
> the
> > > branch somehow.
> 
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> positive
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 
> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> community.
> 
> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
> cannot
> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
> some
> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
> version.
> 
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> 
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to
> Linus
> during the next merge window.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> 
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> > 
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > > 
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > > 
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for this
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > > 
> > > Could you please pull:
> > > 
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next-initial-domain-v4
> > > 
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged on
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change the
> > > branch somehow.
> 
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 

Sure.
Jeremy?


> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> community.
> 

Thank you very much for understanding!


> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot
> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some
> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's version.
> 
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> 
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus
> during the next merge window.
 
All right.
I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
of the result.
Please checkout this branch:

git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5

and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
conflicts.

Cheers,

Stefano

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 04:16:17PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Stefano,
> > 
> > [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> > 
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > Stephen,
> > > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > > > 
> > > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > > xen: initial domain support
> > > > 
> > > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for this
> > > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > > > 
> > > > Could you please pull:
> > > > 
> > > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next-initial-domain-v4
> > > > 
> > > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged on
> > > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change the
> > > > branch somehow.
> > 
> > Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive
> > reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> > 
> 
> Sure.
> Jeremy?

The patches touch the Xen PCI components, so:

Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>

And yeah, we need to update the MAINTAINERS file. Let me spin one out
with the folks who are currently involved in this.

> 
> 
> > I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> > that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> > community.
> > 
> 
> Thank you very much for understanding!
> 
> 
> > Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot
> > use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some
> > other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
> > from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's version.
> > 
> > Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> > aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> > 
> > Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus
> > during the next merge window.
>  
> All right.
> I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
> linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
> of the result.
> Please checkout this branch:
> 
> git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5

Just as a note, you might want to create a branch titled

#linux-next in your git tree and link the reviewed/acked/tested branch to it. That way
Stephen does not have to change his entries in the linux-next tree every release.

> 
> and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
> conflicts.

/me nods. Works nicely. Thank you for doing this on such a short-time frame.

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Yes all ok.

	J

"Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Stefano,
>> 
>> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
>> 
>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
><stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
>> > 
>> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> > > Stephen,
>> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
>> > > 
>> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
>> > > xen: initial domain support
>> > > 
>> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since
>several
>> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and
>for this
>> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
>> > > 
>> > > Could you please pull:
>> > > 
>> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
>linux-next-initial-domain-v4
>> > > 
>> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series
>merged on
>> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
>> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
>> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
>the
>> > > branch somehow.
>> 
>> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
>positive
>> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
>> 
>
>Sure.
>Jeremy?
>
>
>> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise
>that
>> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the
>Xen
>> community.
>> 
>
>Thank you very much for understanding!
>
>
>> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
>cannot
>> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
>some
>> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
>> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
>version.
>> 
>> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer
>is
>> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
>> 
>> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to
>Linus
>> during the next merge window.
> 
>All right.
>I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
>linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
>of the result.
>Please checkout this branch:
>
>git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
>2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5
>
>and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
>conflicts.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Stefano
>
>_______________________________________________
>Virtualization mailing list
>Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
>https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> The patches touch the Xen PCI components, so:
> 
> Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> 
> And yeah, we need to update the MAINTAINERS file. Let me spin one out
> with the folks who are currently involved in this.
> 

Thanks

> > All right.
> > I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
> > linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
> > of the result.
> > Please checkout this branch:
> > 
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5
> 
> Just as a note, you might want to create a branch titled
> 
> #linux-next in your git tree and link the reviewed/acked/tested branch to it. That way
> Stephen does not have to change his entries in the linux-next tree every release.
> 

Good idea, I have created a link called linux-next to
2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5 so the following should also work:

git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next

> > 
> > and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
> > conflicts.
> 
> /me nods. Works nicely. Thank you for doing this on such a short-time frame.
> 

Great, thanks!

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Chris Wright]

* Dan Magenheimer (dan.magenheimer@oracle.com) wrote:
> > Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> > positive reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> 
> I am not officially listed as a maintainer for Xen, but fwiw:
> 
> Acked-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
> 
> And, Stephen, I think Chris Wright and virtualization@lists.osdl.org
> are stale entries in the MAINTAINERS file for Xen development,
> so you are unlikely to receive replies from him/them.
> (Chris, virtualization@lists.osdl.org ... please feel free
> to correct me if I am wrong.)

Yeah, I'm not really doing Xen pv stuff these days.
The virtualization list itself is always open, and it's useful for
things that cross over (e.g. virtio, pv clock, pv spinlocks).

thanks,
-chris

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2019 bytes --]

Hi Stefano,

On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:47:51 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>
> Good idea, I have created a link called linux-next to
> 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5 so the following should also work:
> 
> git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next

I have added that branch from today with just you listed as the contact
(if you ant anyone else (even a mailing list) listed as a contact, just
let me know.

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 

You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
     * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
	Signed-off-by,
     * posted to the relevant mailing list,
     * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
     * successfully unit tested, and 
     * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.

Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell 
sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Legal Stuff:
By participating in linux-next, your subsystem tree contributions are
public and will be included in the linux-next trees.  You may be sent
e-mail messages indicating errors or other issues when the
patches/commits from your subsystem tree are merged and tested in
linux-next.  These messages may also be cross-posted to the linux-next
mailing list, the linux-kernel mailing list, etc.  The linux-next tree
project and IBM (my employer) make no warranties regarding the linux-next
project, the testing procedures, the results, the e-mails, etc.  If you
don't agree to these ground rules, let me know and I'll remove your tree
from participation in linux-next.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:47:51 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > Good idea, I have created a link called linux-next to
> > 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5 so the following should also work:
> > 
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next
> 
> I have added that branch from today with just you listed as the contact
> (if you ant anyone else (even a mailing list) listed as a contact, just
> let me know.
> 
> Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
> you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
> linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
> conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 
> 

Thank you!