Message-ID: <1351071279.2237.126.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V5] PVH patches for v3.8.
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
        "mukesh.rathor@oracle.com" <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:34:39 +0100
In-Reply-To: <5087B13402000078000A3CBB@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
References: <1351015931-16991-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
	 <5087B13402000078000A3CBB@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1123
Lines: 29

On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 08:13 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:

> >  include/xen/interface/memory.h       |   29 ++++++-
> >  include/xen/interface/physdev.h      |   10 ++
> 
> ... any changes to the hypervisor interface (didn't look in detail
> what is being changed in these two headers) should first be in
> at least -unstable before being consumed in any official release
> imo.

I'd also like to see at least the interface definitions in the h/v tree
if not the implementation right away.

The flip side is that we have agreed that the interfaces are not
considered set in stone / stable until we've had a chance to review the
implementation, so perhaps it is better not to commit them to
xen-unstable.hg right away.

I don't know what the right answer is. Perhaps we should at a minimum
reserve the subop numbers even if we don't yet define what they mean in
the Xen tree.

Ian.

--
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/