Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [RFC PATCH v6 00/28] libxl: Deprivilege qemu"):
> Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [RFC PATCH v6 00/28] libxl: Deprivilege
> qemu"):
> > I take that this series is going to miss 4.7 at this stage, right?
>
> I'm afraid so. We concluded that a crucial piece - arranging for
Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [RFC PATCH v6 00/28] libxl: Deprivilege qemu"):
> I take that this series is going to miss 4.7 at this stage, right?
I'm afraid so. We concluded that a crucial piece - arranging for the
necessary access controls on privcmd - was not going to be in place
for 4.7.
W
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 12:36:26PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> I take that this series is going to miss 4.7 at this stage, right?
>
Correct.
Wei.
___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
I take that this series is going to miss 4.7 at this stage, right?
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This is a new version of Stefano Stabellini's series
> [PATCH v5 0/6] libxl: xs_restrict QEMU
>
> I took Stefano's code as a spec for how to interact with qemu, and
> have reworked the w
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 06:44:35PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This is a new version of Stefano Stabellini's series
> [PATCH v5 0/6] libxl: xs_restrict QEMU
>
> I took Stefano's code as a spec for how to interact with qemu, and
> have reworked the whole series. In particular, I have
> - rebase
This is a new version of Stefano Stabellini's series
[PATCH v5 0/6] libxl: xs_restrict QEMU
I took Stefano's code as a spec for how to interact with qemu, and
have reworked the whole series. In particular, I have
- rebased onto staging
- split up some of the larger patches
- restructured the
