On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:32:48PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 05/14/2011 11:02 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 05:32:53PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> On 05/14/2011 12:49 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >>>> I assume this means that drivers/block/xen-blkback.c is the last major
> >>>> milestone to be pushed upstream?
> >>> There are also some semi-major ones, but right now the xen-blkback is
> >>> important
> >>> since it provides so much more performance benefit than the QEMU one.
> >> Thanks a lot Konrad, for the report.
> >> Can you tell what the problem was with of xen-blkback.c?
> > Not sure I understand you. Then xen block backend (so
> > drivers/block/xen-blkback/*)
> > is going through review on LKML?
> Sorry, let me rephrase: why has drivers/block/xen-blkback.c not been
> upstreamed to kernel.org yet? What was the blocker(s)? LKLM is a very
> busy list, hard to follow...
xen-blkback has been posted to lkml a couple of times as an RFC,
but afaik it's been only reviewed by one person (Ian Campbell) so far..
So it needs more reviews and ack's (and possibly more iterations before it's
Xen-devel mailing list