Re: [Xen-devel] Backport requests of cs 23420..23423 for 4.0 and 4.1

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 19/07/12 22:54, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Am 19.07.2012 17:11, schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > Keir Fraser writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] Backport requests of cs 23420..23423 for 4.0 
> > and 4.1"):
> > > On 13/07/2012 07:08, "Juergen Gross"<juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > > > I would like to request to include these changesets in 4.0 and
> > > > 4.1. The backport is quite trivial, I can send patches if you are
> > > > willing to take them.
> > > Will need an Ack from George and then patches applied by (or at least an Ack
> > > from) a tools maintainer.
> > Thanks for replying Keir, but I'm rather queasy about this.
> >
> > These patches have not been in any released version of Xen and are
> > fairly substantial.  I would say that we should not backport anything
> > that isn't a critical bugfix which hasn't been sitting in a released
> > version of Xen for a while; and a new feature ought to be considered
> > very carefully.
> >
> > Now maybe the unfortunately extended 4.2 release cycle may mean we
> > should relax this rule but I'd prefer to see a clear justification for
> > why this is important to retrofit to 4.1.
> Live migration is a main high-availability feature of our next release.
>
> A performance degradation of 10% and more will not be easily accepted for
> a system which is expected to be up 24/7.
Is there a reason you can't just do as XenServer and XCP have done, and 
have them in a local patch queue?
Obviously it's better to keep a local patch queue as short as possible, 
but it doesn't seem like you're really going to be that crippled if we 
wait to check them in.
 -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel