Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] (xen) pm-bug-fixes for 2.6.32

[Shriram Rajagopalan <rshriram@xxxxxxxxx>]

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>
>> wrote:
>>        On 03/21/2011 03:13 AM, Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>> 
>>> Can you please pull
>>> 
>>> git://athos.nss.cs.ubc.ca/linux-2.6-pvops.git
>> 
>>> <http://athos.nss.cs.ubc.ca/linux-2.6-pvops.git>
>>        xen/pm-bug-fix
>>> 
>>> #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
>>        xen/next-2.6.32"
>>> 
>>> All patches in this branch have been merged into upstream
>>        kernel.
>> 
>> 
>>        Are they marked to go into the stable/longterm tree, or are we
>>        just
>>        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).


> It's an interesting question. These patches depend (at least textually,
> but also functionally, I think?) on a bunch of the cleanups done in
> upstream (which also includes PVHVM support which isn't in mainline
> 2.6.32).
Yes but your refactoring patches are in xen/next-2.6.32 and that's what these 
patches depend on AFAICT.
> I guess it would be possible to backport these to mainline
> 2.6.32 without all that stuff (or perhaps suggest other bits for
> mainline backport too). I'm not sure it's completely worth it in this
> case though.
> 
> Ian.
> 
>> 
>> Konrad/Ian ?
>> 
>> shriram
>>   J
>> 
>>> 
>>> The diffstat:
>>> 
>>> drivers/xen/manage.c                       |   16
>>        ++++++++--------
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c |   12
>>        ++++++++++--
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.h |    3 ++-
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe_frontend.c |   26
>>> ++++++++++++++++----------
>>> include/xen/xenbus.h                       |    2 +-
>>> 5 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>> 
>>> Kazuhiro SUZUKI (1):
>>>     xen: xenbus PM events support
>>> 
>>> Shriram Rajagopalan (1):
>>>      xen: use freeze/restore/thaw PM events for
>>        suspend/resume/chkpt
>>> 
>>> shriram
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

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