Re: [Xen-devel] Please ack XENMEM_claim_pages hypercall?

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 26.11.12 at 20:07, Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> While it has always been my understanding that the
> hypervisor is intended to be toolstack-independent,
> Jan would like your Ack before committing the hypervisor
> changes.
> 
> So if you still object, please state your objections.
> Otherwise, please ack, so Jan can commit it and Oracle
> can move forward with toolstack development built
> on the hypercall.

Sorry, there must have been some misunderstanding here: First
of all, without a maintainer's ack (Keir's in this case) I can't commit
anything to code that I'm not explicitly listed for as maintainer.

Second, while I said the code itself looks acceptable, I also pointed
out that in the shape it is right now it is dead code, as there's no
user for it. So all we would get would be the risk of new bugs (and
the one I just pointed out worries me in so far as how much testing
this code really has seen).

Third, deferral (or denial) of the patch going in is certainly not a
blocking factor for tools side development at Oracle. In the worst
case, you'd have to maintain the patch in your own tree(s); I do
realize that you want to avoid that (as I would, but there are
examples of patches that we carry in our trees that didn't get
accepted into the community one - luckily they're of smaller size).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel