From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: Xen 4.2 TODO / Release Plan Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:37:30 +0100 Message-ID: <5022254A02000078000936FD@nat28.tlf.novell.com> References: <5020D418020000780009318C@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <5020E85202000078000931F6@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jinsong Liu Cc: Keir Fraser , Ian Campbell , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 07.08.12 at 20:13, "Liu, Jinsong" wrote: > Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 07.08.12 at 09:50, Keir Fraser wrote: >>> On 07/08/2012 07:38, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >>> >>>> Otoh, restoring from saved state that only includes MCG_CAP (but >>>> no MCi_CTL2-s) needs to be handled anyway (forcing MCi_CTL2 >>>> to be zero, which would be trivial as that's the startup state, i.e. >>>> the only complication here is the variable size save record), so >>>> pushing this to post-4.2 as well is a reasonable alternative. >>>> >>>> Keir, Ian? >>> >>> I think we should leave it and handle the variable-sized save record >>> in 4.3. Using hvm_load_entry_zeroextend() to read in save records, >>> with zero padding for older shorter records, should be >>> straightforward enough. >> >> Okay. So Ian, you could then take the corresponding item >> off the list. Or do you do that only once patches make it >> through the regression tester? >> > > So we will leave it and handle it after 4.2, right? Yes. It would be nice if you could then resubmit the rest of the series, addressing pending review comments. Jan