Re: [Xen-devel] çåï Re: [PATCH] missing chunk of HVM direct kernel boot patch

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2014-12-01 at 01:21 -0700, Chun Yan Liu wrote:
> 
> >>> Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> 2014-11-28 äå 20:01 >>> 
> On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 13:55 +0800, Chunyan Liu wrote: 
> >> Found by Stefano, this chunk of the patch was never applied to 
> >> xen-unstable (commit 11dffa2359e8a2629490c14c029c7c7c777b3e47), 
> >> see http://marc.info/?l=qemu-devel&m=140471493425353&w=2. 
> >
> > How strange, "git am" usually makes it pretty difficult to miss hunks. 
> > Sorry about this. 
> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Chunyan Liu <cyliu@xxxxxxxx> 
> 
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> 
> > I'm afraid that despite the circumstances this still needs a release ack 
> > from Konrad. Obviously the upside is fixing a partially implemented 
> > feature, but I'm not sure what the downsides are. 
> >
> > Has this been tested with stubdoms, including when this feature is not 
> > used? My biggest concern is that because this function is also used to 
> > build the command line for the stubdom and the stubdom is PV and hence 
> > has at least a ->kernel setting then this new code might break that use 
> > case, by adding these options when they are not wanted. This path is all 
> > a bit tangled so I'm not 100% sure if those fields are actually set or 
> > not.
> 
> 
> 
> '-kernel' is only added to qemu command line under HVM case. PV would
> 
> not be affected. And only added when device model is upstream qemu, but
> 
> not old qemu-xen. About stubdom, tested before, when stubdom is using

> old qemu-xen, would not be affected.

Ah yes, I'd forgotten we didn't have upstream stubdom yet, obviously any
issues here will become apparent whenever that gets implemented.

Ian.



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