[Xen-devel] Re: xen PV on HVM and initial domain merge in linux-next

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

Yes all ok.

        J

"Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> 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 this
>> > > 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-next-initial-domain-v4
>> > > 
>> > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series
>merged on
>> > > 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
>the
>> > > branch somehow.
>> 
>> Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a
>positive
>> reply from the listed Xen contacts, please,
>> 
>
>Sure.
>Jeremy?
>
>
>> 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
>> community.
>> 
>
>Thank you very much for understanding!
>
>
>> Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I
>cannot
>> use it as is.  All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on
>some
>> other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree).  linux-next is rebuilt
>> from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's
>version.
>> 
>> 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
>Linus
>> during the next merge window.
> 
>All right.
>I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on
>linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top
>of the result.
>Please checkout this branch:
>
>git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git
>2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5
>
>and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge
>conflicts.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Stefano
>
>_______________________________________________
>Virtualization mailing list
>Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel