Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Future of xenbits Linux trees

[Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/05/09 15:36, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 05/06/2009 14:26, "Christian Tramnitz"<chris.ace@xxxxxxx>  wrote:
>
> > Simple reason, there are so many fundamental changes in/before 2.6.29
> > i.e. ext4 and in terms of video support (KMS, GEM) that anything before
> > 2.6.29 (such as the 2.6.27 XCI tree) will be a waste of efforts if that
> > will be the next tree that should have long-term (until pvops merges
> > upstream, haha) support.
> We don't need to wait for pv_ops to be merged. We just need it to have
> near-enough feature parity. Actually now it supports HVM guests I'm tempted
> to just move over to it.
Go ahead!  It is really time to stop forward-porting stuff.  The time is 
much better spent in adding the missing features to pv_ops/dom0.  Also 
just after the 3.4 release is the perfect moment for that move, 3.5 
should be able to ship with a pv_ops based kernel then.
cheers,
  Gerd


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