On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 04:16:17PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Stefano, > > > > [just casting the net a bit wider ...] > > > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next... > > > > > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Stephen, > > > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next: > > > > > > > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as xen events > > > > xen: initial domain support > > > > > > > > they have all the acked-by needed and are both stable since several > > > > weeks, however they depend on Konrad's xen-pcifront series and for this > > > > reason I waited until now to ask for a merge in linux-next. > > > > > > > > Could you please pull: > > > > > > > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git linux-next-initial-domain-v4 > > > > > > > > it contains both series rebased on Konrad's pcifront series merged on > > > > linux-next (warning: it still contains the merge commit of > > > > xen-pcifront-0.8.2 in linux-next). > > > > Let me know if you have any conflicts or if you need me to change the > > > > branch somehow. > > > > Not following the Xen develpment at all, I would like to have a positive > > reply from the listed Xen contacts, please, > > > > Sure. > Jeremy? The patches touch the Xen PCI components, so: Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> And yeah, we need to update the MAINTAINERS file. Let me spin one out with the folks who are currently involved in this. > > > > I do have concerns that this is turning up so late, but I realise that > > that is mainly due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the Xen > > community. > > > > Thank you very much for understanding! > > > > Also, the above tree is based on next-20101019 which means that I cannot > > use it as is. All the trees merged into linux-next must be base on some > > other stable tree (almost always Linus' tree). linux-next is rebuilt > > from scratch every day, so I cannot ever include a previous day's version. > > > > Merging in other stable trees is OK (as long as the other maintainer is > > aware of that and makes sure that their tree does not reabse). > > > > Basically what you send to me should be what you intend to send to Linus > > during the next merge window. > > All right. > I merged Jeremy's and Konrad's branches (the ones you just merged on > linux-next) on top of linux 2.6.36 rc8, then I rebased my series on top > of the result. > Please checkout this branch: > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git 2.6.36-rc8-initial-domain-v5 Just as a note, you might want to create a branch titled #linux-next in your git tree and link the reviewed/acked/tested branch to it. That way Stephen does not have to change his entries in the linux-next tree every release. > > and let me know if it is suitable, it shouldn't have any merge > conflicts. /me nods. Works nicely. Thank you for doing this on such a short-time frame. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
