From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chao Peng Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 for Xen 4.6 0/6] Several PSR fixes in libxl Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:36:56 +0800 Message-ID: <20150930013656.GI5813@pengc-linux.bj.intel.com> References: <1443512995-11853-1-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <20150929093326.GV13821@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1443522653.16718.37.camel@citrix.com> Reply-To: Chao Peng Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1443522653.16718.37.camel@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com, dario.faggioli@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, Wei Liu , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:30:53AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 10:33 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > Now the reasoning bits. Yes, I'm arguing with myself, :-) > > > > We can of course fix it post-4.6, but the released APIs need to be > > maintained forever (even if it is in fact broken). That would definitely > > involve lots of compatibility cruft if we fix it post 4.6. > > > > This patch series is simple enough to reason about and has received > > adequate review from expert in the field, so I have hight confidence in > > it being correct. > > > > I think the benefit of accepting it out-weights the downside. > > Applied all 6 to staging and staging-4.6, with the one tweak discussed in > reply to #5. I see, thanks for the quick action and allow them to go into 4.6. Chao