Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: route irqs to cpu0

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/21/2014 11:59 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 02/21/2014 11:12 AM, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Stefano Stabellini
> > <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, George Dunlap wrote:
> > > > On 02/19/2014 01:53 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 13:43 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ping?
> > > > > No one made a case for a release exception so I put it in my 4.5 pile.
> > > > >
> > > > > >    It would be nice to have this patch for Xen 4.4 as IPI priority
> > > > > > patch won't be pushed before the release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The patch is a minor change and won't impact normal use. When dom0 is
> > > > > > built, Xen always do it on CPU 0.
> > > > > Right, so whoever is doing otherwise already has a big pile of patches I
> > > > > presume?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's rather late to be making such changes IMHO, but I'll defer to
> > > > > George.
> > > > I can't figure out from the description what's the advantage of having it in
> > > > 4.4.
> > > People that use the default configuration won't see any differences but
> > > people that manually modify Xen to start a second domain and assign a
> > > device to it would.
> > > To give you a concrete example, it fixes a deadlock reported by
> > > Oleksandr Tyshchenko:
> > >
> > > http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=139099606402232
> > Right -- I think if I had been cc'd when the patch was submitted, I
> > would have said yes for sure; but at this point I think we just want
> > to get 4.4.0 out without any more delays if possible.
> You were already CCed from the beginning :).
Right. :-)  But as Ian said, no one made a case for a release exception, 
and I got a bit tired of having to ask every time. :-)
 -George

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