On 11.01.2012, at 20:38, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> On 11.01.2012, at 20:16, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm a bit unhappy about the current state of our supposed to be >>> automatically sync'ed linux-headers directory in qemu. It has been >>> updated several times against undefined kernel trees, means against >>> neither a released version nor kvm.git. Now, if I run an update against >>> kvm.git + some local change, I get a churn of removals. Same will happen >>> when that local change ever goes upstream before the other stuff got >>> finally committed. >> >> Yes, call me even more unhappy about it :(. > > May I suggest the following: > > 1) Have the header syncing script take a commit hash that's stored in git. Make script ensure that this has is in Linus' tree. > > 2) Maintain a patch on top of Linus' tree in qemu.git that the script would apply before actually syncing header files. > > That let's us track how we're differing from upstream in a more reliable fashion. Yeah, I guess the ultimate question it boils down to is: when is something upstream? The average time it takes for patches to trickle through to Linus right now is in the magnitude of half a year to a year. > >>> Alex, it looks to me like this is mostly PPC stuff. Can you comment on >>> the origin and workflow? E.g. KVM_CAP_SW_TLB: This has been added half a >>> year ago but is not in any Linux release around. Fishy... >> >> Ok, here's my workflow: >> >> * KVM: receive patches on the ML >> * KVM: wait for reviews, review myself >> * KVM: send out a pull request >> -- this is the point in time where I assume the ABI can be considered stable -- >> * QEMU: run update on the headers, because in a perfect world things should hit kvm.git any day >> * KVM: pull request gets reviews causing not-pulls or abi changes and lots of churn because i need forever to pullreq again ;) >> >> I guess you see the problem. Hence I haven't pushed any kernel header updates since I realized how badly broken that process was. However even the stuff that's in qemu.git now hasn't managed to get upstream yet. > > I don't think it's a broken process. I think you made a reasonable set of assumptions. I think it was just an exceptional circumstance. Several times in a row? No, the assumptions were just wrong. In the kvm world, pull requests don't mean upstream, they mean the same as a patch set. Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
