| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Remus breaks the build
|
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Remus breaks the build |
|
From: |
Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:03:48 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
"Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:08:15 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<4C6C729A.7030206@xxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
Mail-followup-to: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
References: |
<4C6493ED.3040605@xxxxxxxx> <20100813194217.GA6981@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C65B5A5.8020202@xxxxxxxx> <20100818202650.GD2411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C6C729A.7030206@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-03-22) |
On Wednesday, 18 August 2010 at 16:54, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 08/18/2010 01:26 PM, Brendan Cully wrote:
> > That's more git than I've learned. Would a patch suffice? (even
> > producing the diff was non-obvious. It turns out that git add foo; git
> > diff doesn't include the diff for foo!)
>
> What's the origin of the code? Do they have a git tree (I seem to
> remember one). I can pull from that, then apply any local patches you
> may have.
You're probably remembering IMQ, which was a big ugly third-party
module but is no longer necessary, since we can now use IFB. The
little patch I just sent (attached to the last message) was written by
me. It's just a little queueing disciple for buffering outbound
traffic until an rtnetlink message releases it. It's against whatever
pvops tree xen-unstable pulls down (xen/master, I guess). Does that
patch suffice?
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home