On 06.03.2025 14:27, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 06.03.25 14:13, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 06.03.2025 00:32, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> On 25.02.25 12:10, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>> Ping? Especially ... >>>>> >>>>> On 04.02.25 12:33, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> Xenstored is using libxenctrl for only one purpose: to get information >>>>>> about state of domains. >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch series is removing that dependency by introducing a new >>>>>> stable interface which can be used by xenstored instead. >>>>>> >>>>>> There was a RFC series sent out 3 years ago, which I have taken as a >>>>>> base and by addressing all comments from back then. >>>>>> >>>>>> The main differences since that RFC series are: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Instead of introducing an new main hypercall for a stable management >>>>>> interface I have just added a new domctl sub-op, as requested in >>>>>> 2021. >>>>>> >>>>>> - I have added a new library libxenmanage for easy use of the new >>>>>> stable hypervisor interface. Main motivation for adding the library >>>>>> was the recent attempt to decouple oxenstored from the Xen git tree. >>>>>> By using the new library, oxenstored could benefit in the same way as >>>>>> xenstored from the new interface: it would be possible to rely on >>>>>> stable libraries only. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Mini-OS has gained some more config options recently, so it was rather >>>>>> easy to make xenstore[pvh]-stubdom independent from libxenctrl, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please note that the last 4 patches can be committed only after the >>>>>> related Mini-OS patch "config: add support for libxenmanage" has gone in >>>>>> AND the Mini-OS commit-id has been updated in Config.mk accordingly! The >>>>>> Mini-OS patch has been Acked already, so it can go in as soon as patch >>>>>> 5 of this series (the one introducing libxenmanage) has been committed. >>>>>> >>>>>> As patches 1 and 2 change current behavior, Jan didn't want to give his >>>>>> Ack (he didn't reject the patch either). So I'm asking other "Rest" >>>>>> maintainers to look at those patches specifically. >>>>> >>>>> ... patches 1 and 2 could need an additional opinion. >>>> >>>> And another ping. >>>> >>>> One of Andrew, Stefano, Julien, Roger, Anthony, Mical: Please have a look. >>>> >>>> The related discussion between Jan and me can be found here (patches 2 and >>>> 3): >>>> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20250107101711.5980-1-jgr...@suse.com/ >>> >>> I didn't do an in-details review but based on Jan's comments and your >>> replies, I think they are an improvement. If someone else wants to do a >>> proper review, they would be welcome. >>> >>> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org> >> >> I've taken the conservative approach and interpreted this as an ack for the >> two patches in question only, rather than the entire series. Please indicate >> if it was meant the other way around, as then the final 3 patches could also >> go in. > > Sorry, but please revert the last patch of this series you've committed > already. As stated in the cover letter AND that patch, a Mini-OS patch and > the bump of the Mini-OS commit in Config.mk are required in order to avoid > build failures when trying to build the Xenstore-stubdom binaries.
Indeed, I overlooked this while preparing what to commit (while I remember noticing it earlier on). Still it's probably sub-optimal to have a series split in the middle like this. Instead of reverting, let's bump the MiniOS ref in staging instead, as you did suggest on Matrix. Jan
