From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [patch 00/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Xen guest implementation for paravirt_ops interface Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:55:41 -0700 Message-ID: <45FACC0D.3050103@goop.org> References: <20070301232443.195603797@goop.org> <20070316084251.GA23174@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070316084251.GA23174@elte.hu> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Zachary Amsden , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Rusty Russell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wright , Andi Kleen , Jens Axboe , Andrew Morton , Jeff Garzik List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > >> * virtual block device (blockfront) >> * virtual network device (netfront) >> > > note, these drivers should be submitted through the proper block drivers > and network drivers review process - not via the x86_64 tree. > Yes; who should look at them? I posted netfront to net-dev, and Stephen Hemminger commented on it on the last repost, but I'd love them to get more scrutiny. Obviously they're not actually useful without Xen (and vice-versa), so there's not much point in committing them separately. J