Re: [Xen-devel] [PING] various patches

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2014-09-18 at 08:58 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.09.14 at 19:06, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 13:19 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> "REST"-maintainers,
> >> 
> >> is there any chance I could gets acks or otherwise on
> >> 
> >> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-09/msg01751.html 
> > 
> > This looks like x86 rather than rest? In any case it seems like Andrew
> > is looking into it, and if he is happy with it I think that should be
> > sufficient for you to go ahead.
> 
> Both help x86 only for now, but both change common (softirq) code
> in order to do so.

So they do. In the meantime I see Tim has indicated he is happy with
them, and they look good to me to. I think I've understood correctly
that the arch side needs to opt in (IOW no changes needed for ARM until
we want to)

> >> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-09/msg02105.html 
> > 
> > I don't see anything wrong with this, but I'm not sure if the reasons
> > for Keir's original concerns have now gone away or the circumstances
> > have changed etc.
> 
> As said in the non-commit comment - I re-posted with the grown use
> of rangesets in mind (namely the ones Paul added for the multiple
> ioemu servers).

Namely those was what I didn't know about ;-)

> >> Also, does anyone have comments on the approach taken in
> >> 
> >> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-09/msg02103.html 
> >> 
> >> (see namely the not to be committed part of the description)?
> > 
> > The bit about migration to an older hypervisor not working? I think you
> > are right that we don't care to support that.
> 
> Not just that, but also the arch_domain_unpause() approach.
> Andrew was concerned about the possible impact, yet I can't
> see a better approach to do post-restore adjustments with the
> full new state guaranteed to be in place.

In the meantime Tim seems to be taking a look. I've obviously got no
objections to the nop function in the ARM case.

Ian.


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