From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [V10 PATCH 00/23]PVH xen: Phase I, Version 10 patches... Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:25:22 +0100 Message-ID: References: <51EFC780.7030304@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51EFC780.7030304@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: Andrew Cooper Cc: Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 24/07/2013 13:24, "Andrew Cooper" wrote: >>> These V10 patches are in pretty good shape. I've addressed all the >>> issues Jan had in previous versions, and jfyi, he and I've been back >>> and forth on pretty much every patch in this series. Lot of the patches >>> have 'acked' or 'reviewed' tags. Kindly review. >> These need to get in the tree now, or they're going to miss yet another >> cycle. Hasn't it been two/three years? >> >> Acked-by: Keir Fraser > > Other than my minor nit in patch 4, > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper > > If possible, I will see about putting these patches in and running a > standard set of regression tests. Given the extent of changes to both > regular HVM and PV guests, it would be nice to know if there are any > obvious problems caused by the introduction of PVH. That would be most excellent, thank you! -- Keir