qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] State of KVM bits in linux-headers


From: Alexander Graf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] State of KVM bits in linux-headers
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:45:23 +0100

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




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]