From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zachary Amsden Subject: Paravirt-ops next steps Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:27:30 -0800 Message-ID: <4553F1A2.2050802@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Virtualization Mailing List , Rusty Russell , Chris Wright , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org So it's gotten a bit confusing to figure out how we should go about = upstreaming the rest of our patches. Our patchkit in the paravirt-ops = tree currently applies to 2.6.19-rc4-mm2, but there are a number of = conflicts that got resolved when merging into Andi's i386 tree. What is the best way to sanitize the remaining patches so they smoothly = integrate into the appropriate trees? Should we rebase to Andi's tree, = resync to -rc5-mm1, or just cross our fingers and fix up rejects as they = occur? Right now I'm working on getting the timer code for VMI fixed up, and it = requires several hooks in the timer infrastructure and possibly the APIC = infrastructure that has been changed a lot recently by Thomas Gleixner's = patches - I don't see any obvious conflicts, and the new code looks = better, but it would be comforting to know I am baking changes against = the right tree. Zach