Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Xendomains was not correctly suspending domains when a STOP was issued.

[Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2013, 13:19
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Xendomains was not correctly suspending
 domains when a STOP was issued.
> 
> On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 13:15 +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  > From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>  > To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>  > Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" 
> <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>  > Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2013, 12:59
>>  > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Xendomains was not correctly 
> suspending
>>   domains when a STOP was issued.
>>  > 
>>  > On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 12:51 +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
>>  >>  Thanks. BTW, the JSON output of 4.3 looked the same to me as 
> 4.2.2
>>  >>  (i.e. badly formed), so I am not sure the patch you mentioned to 
> make
>>  >>  it well-formed was in as of 4.3 RC5.  if/when the well formed 
> patch is
>>  >>  introduced (if it isn't already), it may very well break this
>>  >>  (xendomains) patch.
>>  > 
>>  > Looks like I was mistaken and that fix was already in 4.2.0 (rc4 to be
>>  > precise).
>> 
>>  Yeah, according to http://jsonlint.com/ the output is valid. I thought it 
> needed a left-hand object name to be valid, but it seems I was wrong. Anyway, 
> it'is all good.
>> 
>>  Thanks.
>> 
>>  p.s. Looks like this patch missed RC6 by 40 minutes. :(
> 
> Actually rc6 effectively happened last night, since the commits made
> then needed to pass testing before they could be considered an rc.

So does that mean this patch will miss 4.3.0 final?


> 
> Ian.
> 

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