On 03/22/2011 02:15 PM, Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
> On 2011-03-22, at 6:43 AM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 23:10 +0000, Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
>>> On 03/21/2011 03:13 AM, Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
>>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>>> Can you please pull
>>>> #xen/pm-bug-fix is based off xen/next-2.6.32,
>>>> commit ea954f6ff4ff5c15c9e2120e86335f6d6490ae0f
>>>> "Merge commit 'konrad-xen/for-2.6.32/bug-fixes~1' into
>>>> All patches in this branch have been merged into upstream
>>> Are they marked to go into the stable/longterm tree, or are we
>>> going to maintain them separately?
>>> I think these should go into the longterm tree. I am a bit clueless as
>>> to what you
>>> exactly mean by "maintaining them separately". I thought next-2.6.32
>>> was meant
>>> as a staging area, that later gets pushed to stable-2.6.32.x
>> I think Jeremy is asking whether these should go in via the upstream
>> "longterm" 2.6.32.y branch rather than only going into the
>> xen/next-2.6.32 branch.
> Thanks Ian.
> Jeremy, I am not sure when/if these are going to go into the longterm branch.
> But I think these should go into xen/next-2.6.32 atleast for the benefit of
> folks who build both dom0 & domU out of your tree(the "make kernels" target
> in xen source).
I just pulled it into xen/next-2.6.32 since it seems too fiddly properly
backport it to plain 2.6.32 and it doesn't really affect many users
(since as I understand it these just fix checkpoints, which have
probably been broken for a long time without complaints).
Xen-devel mailing list