[re-casting the net narrower for this specific reply, don't
reply-all to this if you prefer the wider net]
Note that Chris Wright (and virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) are
still listed as a maintainer (and as a list) for "XEN HYPERVISOR
INTERFACE" in the latest kernel MAINTAINERS file. As a
result, sfr included them on his "request for positive
reply" list in the below message.
Jeremy, as the "other" maintainer, perhaps you should
submit a patch in the 2.6.37 window to fix this (and
also your email address)? And should xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
be the correct email for the remaining list (even though
xensource.com still works)?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:33 PM
> To: Stefano Stabellini
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jeremy Fitzhardinge; Konrad
> Rzeszutek Wilk; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chris Wright;
> virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Andrew
> Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in
> Hi Stefano,
> [just casting the net a bit wider ...]
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next...
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next:
> > >
> > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events
> > > xen: initial domain support
> > >
> > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several
> > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for
> > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next.
> > >
> > > Could you please pull:
> > >
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-
> > >
> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged
> > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of
> > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next).
> > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change
> > > branch somehow.
> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
> I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that
> that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen
> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
> use it as is. All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree). linux-next is rebuilt
> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
> Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is
> aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse).
> Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to
> during the next merge window.
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Xen-devel mailing list