>>> On 24.10.12 at 11:34, Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 08:13 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> > include/xen/interface/memory.h | 29 ++++++- >> > include/xen/interface/physdev.h | 10 ++ >> >> ... any changes to the hypervisor interface (didn't look in detail >> what is being changed in these two headers) should first be in >> at least -unstable before being consumed in any official release >> imo. > > I'd also like to see at least the interface definitions in the h/v tree > if not the implementation right away. > > The flip side is that we have agreed that the interfaces are not > considered set in stone / stable until we've had a chance to review the > implementation, so perhaps it is better not to commit them to > xen-unstable.hg right away. > > I don't know what the right answer is. Perhaps we should at a minimum > reserve the subop numbers even if we don't yet define what they mean in > the Xen tree.
But even then - what use is it to have 3.8 possibly only work on some intermediate (perhaps even just privately built) hypervisors? Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
