On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 04:53:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 15.02.13 at 17:34, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> > >>> wrote: > > I know that the PVH patches are not in the Xen tree. I am hoping that > > at least the hypercalls _are_ OK with everybody so we can continue on > > with this. > > Please don't commit to anything that isn't in the hypervisor tree > yet. IOW I'd like you to not push the PVH bits that use > uncommitted hypervisor interfaces (anything preparatory of > course is okay).
Hm, I believe the only one that was of contention was the 'PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem' which Mukesh reverted. The other one is the XENMEM_add_to_physmap_range, which Ian has for ARM. That is the git commit b6eafa71fa87f4c831e9c2eac736e8ac20b3ea1c in stable/pvh.v7 tree. Oh, there is one change in this git commit b8724d6bd1c09e34b6c76b57d07ea4d3fbd8ed4c ..and that gets reverted in 68c5bb99d8b8abbf70b3380bed8eca69648193f5 (by Ian). So from a hypercall perspective - Ian, is the XENMEM_add_to_physmap_range fully baked ? -- 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/
