Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.5 development update (July update)

[Fabio Fantoni <fabio.fantoni@xxxxxxx>]

Il 23/07/2014 15:45, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Fabio Fantoni wrote:
> > Il 23/07/2014 12:20, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto:
> > > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > (trimming CC to just those related to things I've commented on)
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:28 -0400, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > fair - still working on it, patches are prototypes or RFC
> > > > You've used this (correctly per your definition here) on various things
> > > > which it seems to me are very unlikely to make it for 4.5, i.e. things
> > > > which are really early prototypes etc, which made me pause every time I
> > > > ready it and have to think back to the definition.
> > > >
> > > > I guess what I'm saying is that "fair" is not a good label for this
> > > > state, it implies that while the thing is a WIP it is still likely to
> > > > make it for 4.5.
> > > >
> > > > I think you need a lower ranked WIP label for things which are in that
> > > > state of prototype/RFC but not likely to make 4.5. "wip" or "inprogress"
> > > > perhaps.
> > > >
> > > > > = Open =
> > > > >
> > > > > == ARM ==
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > *  ARM VM save/restore/live migration (ok)
> > > > >     -  Junghyun Yoo
> > > > I've not heard from Junghyun since the initial reposting, not sure what
> > > > the prognosis is but given lack of support for SMP and some of the other
> > > > issues I'm more incline to suggest fair rather than OK. Jinghyun, do you
> > > > have any thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > It's possible that the "save/restore/dead-migration" bit is "ok", it's
> > > > the live migration bits where the issues mostly remain iffy.
> > > >
> > > > Also this is dependent on the migration v2 by Andrew et al.
> > > >
> > > > > *  ARM: Use super pages in p2m (ok)
> > > > >      v5 posted
> > > > >     -  Ian Campbell
> > > > Committed.
> > > >
> > > > > == QEMU ==
> > > > >
> > > > > *  Rebase of QEMU 2.0 and SeaBIOS (fair)
> > > > >     -  Ian Jackson
> > > > What is this? Neither of them sound like Ian J things. Stefano maintains
> > > > Qemu and I take care of SeaBIOS.
> > > Yeah, it should be me for QEMU and it is done.
> > >
> > >
> > > > >From the SeaBIOS side we are currently using the latest upstream.
> > > >
> > > > IIRC Stefano has merged the version of qemu which he intends 4.5 to ship
> > > > with, but he should confirm...
> > > Yes, I have already merged QEMU 2.0.0 and I am not planning to merge
> > > again a new QEMU upstream release before 4.5.
> > qemu 2.1 is near to be released, now is rc3, why not update to 2.1?
> I don't think we would have enough time to test it throughly.
However, the major distributions will update to latest qemu tested or 
notin Xen.
I think it's always best to use the latest stable qemu in xen-unstable, 
at least until will xen reach the freeze.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel