From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wei Liu Subject: Re: Commit moratorium Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 13:12:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20150904121217.GB27133@zion.uk.xensource.com> References: <20150903162517.GO18474@zion.uk.xensource.com> <55E967F8020000780009F838@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <20150904115219.GR18474@zion.uk.xensource.com> <55E9A5D2020000780009FA39@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXprM-0000aU-NM for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 12:12:48 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55E9A5D2020000780009FA39@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, Ian Campbell , tim@xen.org, Ian Jackson , Julien Grall , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, keir@xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 06:08:18AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 04.09.15 at 13:52, wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 01:44:24AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 03.09.15 at 18:25, wrote: > >> > Xen tree is going to branch at 4.6 RC3. I don't want to branch when > >> > master != staging, so please avoid committing new patches to staging now > >> > to let master catch up with staging. Another announcement will be made > >> > when the moratorium is lifted. > >> > >> Hmm, I think you will want to wait for a fix for the ARM64 regression > >> Julien reported before cutting RC3. > >> > > > > That was reported after I made this announcement. > > > > Judging from the conversation in that thread we already have an idea > > what was broken. Is the fix going to be complex? > > You may have seen the tentative patch meanwhile - it's a one liner. > > > I think we can make the decision whether to wait for it based on it's > > complexity. > > > > If we're sure it's not going to be too invasive, it doesn't matter if > > it's committed before or after branching because the cost of applying > > that to two trees would be minimum. Another thing I consider is that we > > want OSSTest to have a push over the weekend. With both considerations > > in mind, it would be OK if a simple patch gets committed today. > > My concern is not about the need for backporting, but about the > usefulness (on ARM64) of an RC3 without that fix. > I will certainly mention that fix in my email. But this point is moot since I said in the other email I was happy with that one-liner applied today. Wei. > Jan