Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00 of 11 v5] NUMA aware credit scheduling

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 16.04.13 at 17:22, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On 16.04.13 at 14:16, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Dario Faggioli
>>> <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On gio, 2013-04-11 at 13:41 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>>> Keir,
>>>>>
>>>> Ping?
>>>
>>> Given the state we are in the release cycle, and the importance of
>>> this patch, and the relative simplicity of the changes in Xen outside
>>> of the scheduler:
>>>
>>> Tim and Jan, would one of you be willing to use an "Apply unless Keir
>>> objects" policy?
>>
>> Going through patches 1...5 again,
>>
>> - 1 and 2 touch tools/, but don't have a tools maintainer ack yet
>> - 1 touches the public interface (even if only the one affecting
>>   the tools)
> ...
>> - 5 has a public interface change again
> 
> I thought the policy was that the tools & the hypervisor have to
> remain in lockstep -- only libxl and the kernel interfaces need to be
> backwards-compatible, right?  Do either of these changes affect those?

No, as I said, they touch only the hypervisor<->tools interface.
But it's an interface change nevertheless (and hence less of a
candidate for overriding commit policy).

Jan


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