Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755581AbZFBR2p (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:28:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754887AbZFBR2i (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:28:38 -0400 Received: from zrtps0kp.nortel.com ([47.140.192.56]:43489 "EHLO zrtps0kp.nortel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754686AbZFBR2i (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:28:38 -0400 Message-ID: <4A256132.90802@nortel.com> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 11:28:18 -0600 From: "Chris Friesen" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-6 (X11/20050513) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Dunlap CC: Thomas Gleixner , David Miller , "jeremy@goop.org" , "mingo@elte.hu" , Dan Magenheimer , "avi@redhat.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Keir Fraser , "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" , "gregkh@suse.de" , "kurt.hackel@oracle.com" , Ian Pratt , "xen-users@lists.xensource.com" , ksrinivasan , "EAnderson@novell.com" , "wimcoekaerts@wimmekes.net" , Stephen Spector , "jens.axboe@oracle.com" , "npiggin@suse.de" Subject: Re: Xen is a feature References: <162f4c90-6431-4a2a-b337-6d7451d7b11e@default> <20090528001350.GD26820@elte.hu> <4A1F302E.8030501@goop.org> <20090528.210559.137121893.davem@davemloft.net> <4A1FCE8E.2060604@eu.citrix.com> <4A25564A.70608@eu.citrix.com> In-Reply-To: <4A25564A.70608@eu.citrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jun 2009 17:28:25.0740 (UTC) FILETIME=[892F6CC0:01C9E3A7] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1274 Lines: 29 George Dunlap wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > No one disputes the idea that changes shouldn't be ugly; no one disputes > the idea that changes shouldn't introduce performance regressions. But > there are patchqueues that are ready, signed-off by other maintainers, > and which Ingo admits that he has no technical objections to, but > refuses to merge. I can't comment on this part, but if so that seems unfortunate. > The main point of Jeremy's e-mail was NOT to say, "Lots of people use > this so you should merge it." He's was responding to Xen being treated > like it had no benefit. It does have a benefit; it is a feature. I don't know about others, but I certainly interpreted a number of posts saying exactly that--that it's useful so it should be included. I don't think anyone is arguing that Xen is not useful or that it should not ever be included, rather the question is whether the current set of patches is suitable for addition or whether they are too messy and should be cleaned up first. Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/