From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zhenzhong Duan Subject: Re: Xen 4.4 development update: Code freezing point reached Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:17:43 +0800 Message-ID: <528C29D7.7030003@oracle.com> References: <20131119144026.GA5728@phenom.dumpdata.com> Reply-To: zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20131119144026.GA5728@phenom.dumpdata.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: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , George Dunlap Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 2013-11-19 22:40, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 06:19:46PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote: >> This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.4 Roadmap wiki page: >> http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.4 >> >> (And I actually updated the wiki this time.) >> >> The code "freezing point" is today; which means that starting today >> non-bug fixes need a freeze exception to be included. >> >> Remember our goal for the release: >> 1. A bug-free release >> 2. An awesome release >> 3. An on-time release >> >> Accepting a new feature may make Xen more awesome; but it also >> introduces a risk that it will introduce more bugs. That bug may be >> found before the release (threatening #3), or it may not be found >> until after the release (threatening #1). Each freeze exception >> request will attempt to balance the benefits (how awesome the >> exception is) vs the risks (will it cause the release to slip, or >> worse, cause a bug which goes un-noticed into the final release). >> >> The idea is that today we will be pretty permissive, but that we will >> become progressively more conservative until the first RC, which is >> scheduled for 3 weeks' time (6 December). After that, we will only >> accept bug fixes. >> >> Bug fixes can be checked in without a freeze exception throughout the >> code freeze, unless the maintianer thinks they are particularly high >> risk. In later RC's, we may even begin rejecting bug fixes if the >> broken functionality is small and the risk to other functionality is >> high. >> >> Features which are currently marked "experimental" or do not at the >> moment work at all cannot be broken really; so changes to code only >> used by those features should be able to get a freeze exception >> easily. (Tianocore is something which would probably fall under >> this.) >> >> Features which change or add new interfaces which will need to be >> supported in a backwards-compatible way (for instance, vNUMA) will >> need freeze exceptions to make sure that the interface itself has >> enough time to be considered stable. >> >> These are guidelines and principles to give you an idea where we're >> coming from; if you think there's a good reason why making an >> exception for you will help us achieve goals 1-3 above better than not >> doing so, feel free to make your case. > I am wondering in which category the tmem cleanup patches fall? > > They aren't bug-fixes, they could be considered a feature. They were > posted before the deadline. I posted the GIT PULL (see > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.xen.devel/178043) > to one of the folks who has write access to the repository (as > documented in http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html)? > > >> == Open == >> >> * qemu-upstream not freeing pirq >> > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/devel/281498 >> status: patches posted; latest patches need testing > Duan, ping? I didn't have a test env to test this. This need to reimage the env. Regards zduan