On 11.01.2012, at 20:41, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 01/11/2012 01:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>>> I would like to see us avoiding this in the future. Headers update >>>> patches should mention the source and should not be merged until the ABI >>>> changes actually made it at least into kvm.git. Same applies, of course, >>>> to the functional changes related to that ABI. Otherwise we risk quite >>>> some mess on everyone's side. >>> >>> I agree. >>> >>>> Another thing: KVM_CAP_PPC_HIOR has been removed again from the kernel >>>> and also the header. Is there real free space now or will the cap >>>> reappear? If there should better be a placeholder, let's add it (to the >>>> kernel). >>> >>> I will reappear with ONE_REG semantics. >>> >> >> OK. >> >> Then please clean up now so that update-linux-headers.sh can be used >> again by "normal" developers. :) > > Before we did submodules and had a responsive BIOS maintainer, we maintained patches within qemu.git for our external dependencies. I think that's a good strategy here too. It's a little painful, but not entirely awful. > > At least it makes it possible for you to (hopefully) trivial rebase a patch if something is still in limbo. Yeah, that works. I can easily script that part. It doesn't solve the actual underlying problem though that we don't know when the abi is actually stable. I'm slowly starting to understand Pekka ;). 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
