Re: [Xen-devel] [V11 PATCH 00/21]PVH xen: Phase I, Version 11 patches...

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 23.08.13 at 03:18, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Finally, I've the V11 set of patches.
> 
> V11:
>    - gdt union patch not needed anymore, so dropped it.
>    - patch 17 made the last patch
>    - merged patch 22 and 23. 

So I'd be okay with applying 1...8 and 10...16, provided
- you, Mukesh, can confirm that 9 can safely be left out,
- you, George, don't object to that (considering your comments
  on v10).

Additionally, Mukesh, please finally get used to Cc-ing respective
maintainers. Considering the changes all have is_pvh_...() around
critical changes, and considering that Keir had ack-ed the whole
v10, I'm willing to ignore the general need for e.g. VMX maintainers
to ack VMX-specific changes. But now that you successfully ignored
this rule for the 11th time, I'm afraid you really got used to this and
won't change without being explicitly told.

And while at formal aspects, a minor other remark: The up-to-date
xen-devel address is as Cc-ed here, @lists.xensource.com is _two_
generations old at this point.

Jan


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