[Xen-devel] Ping: backport proposals (was: Xen 4.2.3-rc2 and 4.1.6-rc2 have been tagged)

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 12.09.13 at 11:11, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 02.09.13 at 20:17, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> As a group - more detail in the console ring in the case of a crash:
>> * 66450c1d1ab3c4480bbba949113b95d1ab6a943a "xen/conring: Write to
>> console ring even if console lock is busted"
>> * cc90bf1894daf9f97791495e2256e7e342e25704 "xen/conring: Clean up
>> writing to the console ring"
> 
> I can see the value of the latter, but the former seems to be pure
> cleanup (which we don't normally backport).
> 
>> As a group - improvements around console_force_unlock():
>> * 44db24103ff1c53a13afebf4d72ad853cee07786 "fix gdbstub build c/s
>> c8177e691f"
>> * 7b9fa702ca323164d6b49e8b639a57f880454a8c "watchdog/crash: Always
>> disable watchdog in console_force_unlock()"
>> * 896934596614b44c20a37263c9decb0b639ef995 "x86/watchdog: Tweak
>> implementation given new common code"
>> * c8177e691f0f611240853326712d43482ec949bf "watchdog: Move watchdog from
>> being x86 specific to common code"
> 
> The real meat here is the second one, and for a backport I'd
> prefer to limit the change to this, even if that means that we'll
> have to add an #ifdef CONFIG_X86 to common code.

I was expecting some sort of response to this from you; silence
meaning to me that you don't care anymore...

Jan


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