[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/mm: don't needlessly veto migration
On 09.10.19 12:21, George Dunlap wrote:
On 10/9/19 11:16 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.10.2019 18:38, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 08/10/2019 17:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
From: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
Now that xl.cfg has an option to explicitly enable IOMMU mappings for a
domain, migration may be needlessly vetoed due to the check of
is_iommu_enabled() in paging_log_dirty_enable().
There is actually no need to prevent logdirty from being enabled unless
devices are assigned to a domain.
NOTE: While in the neighbourhood, the bool_t parameter type in
paging_log_dirty_enable() is replaced with a bool and the format
of the comment in assign_device() is fixed.
Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
Seriously FFS. Why am I having to repeat myself? What if any way
unclear on the previous threads?
NACK NACK NACK.
With George having given his R-b I'm now in an awkward position:
I shouldn't ignore this triple NACK and commit the patch, but
there's also no sensible way forward here which would allow the
regression to be taken care of without committing the patch in
its current shape. Are you willing to take back all three of the
NACKs, allowing us to continue discussion on the controversial
part of Paul's patch while also allowing the non-controversial
part to go in right away?
Regardless of the merits of the change Andy wants to see, it's not a one
that should be made during a feature freeze.
Indeed. So either we take this patch or we have to revert the patch(es)
introducing the regression.
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
