Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for July 20
On 07/20/2010 11:29 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: It's a pitty I can't easily attend to this conference call, as it seems a lot of decisions are taken there. Anyway let me comment the part concerning 0.12 stable: Is it a matter of time zone or conflict? The call has historically been centered around KVM issues but these days it's hard to make such a clear distinction.. On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 07:45:51AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: 0.12.stable - start w/ git tree + pull requests - release process is separate from commit access - justin will put up a tree for pull requests - there's current backlog, what about that? I think someone should actively follow the patches committed to HEAD and backport them when they seems to be stable material. I guess it's what's Justin plans to do. OTOH, it might be useful if people sending patches to HEAD adds a small comment about cherry-picking the patch to stable if it applies. My big concern with -stable is testing. For folks interested in helping out, what I'd really like to see is people explicitly testing their patches on -stable. IOW, just saying "this is probably stable material" is not nearly as helpful as saying, "I've verified this cherry picks cleanly to stable and tested there." - anthony's concern with -stable is the testing (upstream tree gets more testing than -stable) Debian gets regular uploads with the contents of the -stable tree between to releases. Also patches from trunk are all cherry-picked from HEAD. That's good to know. My main point was that proportionately speaking, the master branch gets considerably more testing than the stable branch. Considering that there is a higher expectation of stable too, the testing requirement for it is pretty high in my opinion. Regards, Anthony Liguori - 0.12.5? - planning to do next w/ 0.13 release - aurelien may cut a release Following the minutes from last week, I sent a call for release, with a deadline today. I only got the patch series from Kevin. There are currently 44 patches waiting in the stable tree, so I guess we can go for a release. I plan to do that later this week if nobody opposes. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: KVM call minutes for July 20
On 07/20/10 08:45, Chris Wright wrote: > 0.13 > - rc RSN (hopefully this week, top priority for anthony) Can Cam's inter-vm shared memory device get committed for 0.13? It's been stagnant on the list for a while now waiting for inclusion (or NAK comments). David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for July 20
It's a pitty I can't easily attend to this conference call, as it seems a lot of decisions are taken there. Anyway let me comment the part concerning 0.12 stable: On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 07:45:51AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > 0.12.stable > - start w/ git tree + pull requests > - release process is separate from commit access > - justin will put up a tree for pull requests > - there's current backlog, what about that? I think someone should actively follow the patches committed to HEAD and backport them when they seems to be stable material. I guess it's what's Justin plans to do. OTOH, it might be useful if people sending patches to HEAD adds a small comment about cherry-picking the patch to stable if it applies. > - anthony's concern with -stable is the testing (upstream tree gets more > testing than -stable) Debian gets regular uploads with the contents of the -stable tree between to releases. Also patches from trunk are all cherry-picked from HEAD. > - 0.12.5? > - planning to do next w/ 0.13 release > - aurelien may cut a release Following the minutes from last week, I sent a call for release, with a deadline today. I only got the patch series from Kevin. There are currently 44 patches waiting in the stable tree, so I guess we can go for a release. I plan to do that later this week if nobody opposes. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
KVM call minutes for July 20
0.12.stable - start w/ git tree + pull requests - release process is separate from commit access - justin will put up a tree for pull requests - there's current backlog, what about that? - anthony's concern with -stable is the testing (upstream tree gets more testing than -stable) - 0.12.5? - planning to do next w/ 0.13 release - aurelien may cut a release - justin will do some sanity testing, most patches are in fedora anyway 0.13 - rc RSN (hopefully this week, top priority for anthony) kvm testsuite - was planning to clean up and contribute to qemu - now thinking perhaps just split it out to its own repo - not really qemu code, not really kvm code, not cross compile, etc.. - could use std serial device - could use vga (needs mmio space) - - would like to add nested svm and (more important) nested vmx - small bit to copy l1 to l2 state, to make guest nested - need framework, can then require nested patches come w/ regression tests - current testsuite failing on qemu (shows softmmu issues, any takers?) fw_cfg issues - mostly on list - concerns about dma interface (too close to use case specific hack) - rep could be optimized in general - each byte == function call - possible pull in 4k (instead of 1k) on each exit - bar for changes should be no new interfaces -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
