Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Xen-devel Digest, Vol 71, Issue 85

To:	domiel forty-two <domiel42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Xen-devel Digest, Vol 71, Issue 85
From:	Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 18 Feb 2011 07:08:05 +0000
Cc:
Delivery-date:	Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:08:50 -0800
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to :message-id:thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PkqP0Z/0By7T70amiutwEFL+mzkjvToZSRQQCVrPwh4=; b=AQu7/tXJm5JIItrXv8+lM4ZJIQROj9w4mMofLgnCJWw1iXTjJO2f/NY9RR80kftN8J hePPxrQt7I/1Obw13Ib1IqhQ5988/k22pdUyUDKahjSOB+PI+DqdLXw0Gji3p91kf1Wj 3vDsQxpg03ctMLrFXKwcVp7gvQ7rc0RCI7jgM=
Domainkey-signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=bdjJWyRH3hoDULRzoeO4CGyUoDiQHQVmxty+ZawQY7wkRYNQOoW/xBMzbdP0/T7ZiV f93XqMHzlsFBiUnyn1deb5YB5UBsfCC8/bCkXgHEJiF+0PlEWHjoLj7MskSvSTUg/Z7k hVrdsFuhDzrgWrCqee2GUYoGVQPDOzbhMKKLs=
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<528111.91222.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcvPOpZ8TY+xnljplE+E07NLt/74Lw==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] Re: Xen-devel Digest, Vol 71, Issue 85
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117

On 18/02/2011 02:44, "domiel forty-two" <domiel42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi all!
> 
> Did the nested xen stuff make it into the xen-unstable (4.1-rc1?) tree as
> suggested back in January by Tim Deegan?

Tim meant that the patches may be applied to xen-unstable after 4.1 is
branched from it. I.e., they are candidates for 4.2, not 4.1.

 -- Keir

> TIA
> 
> 
> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:01:12 +0000
> From: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/12] Nested Virtualization: Overview
> To: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>,    "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
>     <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Dong,     Eddie" <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <20110107160112.GC5651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> At 16:02 +0000 on 20 Dec (1292860962), Christoph Egger wrote:
>> This patch series brings Nested Virtualization to Xen.
>> This is the seventh patch series.
> 
> Thanks for this.  I've commented on patch 4 (core) and patch 12
> (hap-on-hap) separately.  Also I think we need an Acked-by: from Eddie
> for patches 1-8. 
> 
> Apart from that I think we can check these in as soon as the 4.1
> branch has been taken, and fix up any remaining issues in-tree.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Tim.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Xen-devel Digest, Vol 71, Issue 85