Re: [Xen-devel] preparing for 4.3.1

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 27.09.13 at 12:35, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In terms of bugs, it would be very nice for my migration stream
> regression fix to get in, although I suspect that the answer will be
> "its too close to the cutoff and still not in unstable yet".  FWIW,
> given the lack of support for remus in libxl in 4.3, the backport is
> substantially smaller than what needs to go into unstable.  I guess this
> call goes to either of the Ian's

Correct.

> The first of my per_cpu() fixes (posted yesterday) really needs
> backporting, although there has been curious silence to series so far. 
> The second of the series would also be a very good idea.  (Given the
> damage it is causing to XenServer trunk using Xen 4.3 and Linux 3.10 for
> dom0, I am amazed we are the first people to find this, although it is
> likely an interaction with our stats collecting daemon)

I can only approve the x86 part of it, and George (had you
Cc-ed him) could only approve the scheduler part of it. As in
any event I'd like to see Keir's opinion (in form of an ack or
whatever) on this sort of a change (including the second one),
it'll be unavoidable to wait for his reply. But yes, once in these
two would be backporting candidates even without you asking
for it.

Additionally, for both items you brought up above: The call for
backport requests is really mainly for stuff already in unstable
(and generally also already past the push gate). Therefore I
take all of the above only as a general hint towards a request
to come...

> I know these are not strictly bugfixes but the 5 rombios fixes (top five
> commits to tools/firmware/rombios/rombios.c) should be considered.  They
> combine to a noticable reduction in time taken to boot HVM domains
> (windows in particular which loads all of its core data with int $0x13),
> as well as a substantial reduction in the spike qemu cpu usage in dom0. 
> FWIW, Recent XenServers have shipped with these patches backported to
> 4.1, and it was only my lack of repeated prodding which prevented it
> going into 4.3 in the first place.

Again this is the tool stack maintainers' call.

> There is nothing else obvious in the XenServer patch queue.

Good to know.

Jan


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