we had some discussion with Jan in the background:
On 01/04/2011 03:14 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.01.11 at 14:34, Samuel Kvasnica <bugreports@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Did you *try* whether it applies to the 2.6.18 tree? And in order
>>> for it to be applied (given that the 2.6.18 tree is legacy and not
>>> fully maintained anymore), you'd also have to specifically indicate
>>> that it's intended for that tree in the subject, otherwise Keir will
>>> just ignore any Linux patches, assuming they're destined for
>> well, never tried 2.6.18 and I did not even assume xen community still
>> sticks to 2.6.18 tree
>> for whatever strange reasons. There is no way to even boot 2.6.18 in my
>> case, so lets forget
>> about it, not going to submit patch without testing it on real system.
> In all reality that's what happens quite frequently.
Pasi: do you see a possibility to try it out on 2.6.18 ? I'm not sure
if anybody from Fujitsu takes
actively care, it is quite old code.
>> Well, ok, so now whats the procedure to get this by default at least to
>> opensuse kernel ?
> If it is reasonably applicable to the 2.6.18 kernel, we prefer getting
> it through that tree. Second choice would be to get it through the
> pv-ops one, pointing us to the relevant commits. Third choice (we
> actually did so only very few times thus far, and we're going to be
> reluctant to take anything that could go through either of the
> earlier paths) is to give us the patch on top of our HEAD/master
> tree, accompanied by sufficient information on what the change
> does and how was tested (so we can judge how likely regressions
> from the patch might be).
Jan: but if I understood Pasi, he claims there are no pvscsi drivers
included in the pv-ops tree at all
because it was not ported so far.
But your opensuse pv-ops kernel definitely includes pvscsi drivers -
does this part exist only in
suse kernel tree ?
Xen-devel mailing list