From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Goldstein Subject: Re: Backports for Xen 4.6 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:09:54 -0600 Message-ID: <569FA342.7090603@cardoe.com> References: <569D0A68.4060003@citrix.com> <569F8BA002000078000C90AE@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <569F881C.9060403@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9069051232080149002==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <569F881C.9060403@citrix.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: Andrew Cooper , Jan Beulich Cc: Ian Jackson , Xen-devel List List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --===============9069051232080149002== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4CLjpLf31urx1k0hIUKAfumFJmIbvwK9m" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --4CLjpLf31urx1k0hIUKAfumFJmIbvwK9m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/20/16 7:14 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 20/01/16 12:29, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 18.01.16 at 16:53, wrote: >>> Possibly also: >>> 42940c046902 "x86/shadow: Fix missing newline in dprintk()" >> The affected statement compiles to nothing in a release build, which >> can be taken as an argument both ways. I lean towards not putting >> it in. >> >>> 6851e979874e "VT-d: use proper error codes in iommu_enable_x2apic_IR(= )" >> Since I had pulled this into our own tree already, and since you're >> now also viewing this as useful, I guess I will throw it in. >> >>> 0ce647ad6f70 "x86: suppress bogus log message" >> This being a purely cosmetic change, may I ask for the reason >> you consider this a backport candidate? >=20 > The shear volume reduction in debug builds. >=20 > XenServer ships both a release and a debug hypervisor for first-line > triage of customer issues. As such, "only affecting a debug build" > isn't a relevant consideration for us, and I expect we are not alone he= re. >=20 > ~Andrew >=20 I will likely locally backport this one myself if it doesn't land in 4.6.1 because we too have a debug variant and a release variant. --=20 Doug Goldstein --4CLjpLf31urx1k0hIUKAfumFJmIbvwK9m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWn6NFXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRBNTM5MEQ2RTNFMTkyNzlCNzVDMzIwOTVB MkJDMDNEQzg3RUQxQkQ0AAoJEKK8A9yH7RvU7JsP/1Uo9JOd/wpU3pkdBv8HACgU 5RnhG2UtRbeNvcR+hobbVMpDdvereZsLwWmhjjBY2aBQ0YOwsdx8a/d1MCQYbvcY EbCazlH1WCldQmM+/V+SCU2MmqecruEdQYvfpFlWdj85CKaHF45tv/TC3iQHJMHh uGwRQePGKQ4LGyao/I7Nn/ctLE7DG8C8amFcRtZ0EV3KL1buA6b8tA3U4JsTefUR kQpoxFD4cZGWXsFImyDFkT5sKsFGeip54aGTk+PaxkUR4fXi1VOA8/C4Mz3BWYRx y9Bd6s3Nc8kfKb+he/5bYVIw3ZORWpB7DbNErmcJlrSwRyfIAFiRZJHV2JjNGNzN IYz/6oYcP6QVvlfzoFE2ANwD+yEMBfMN3g+5xazDhGErMOA/wSK8XJnqeY5oC626 xORwil5qHSv0rw/9u3Wy/Ge//6ScZCme2Jvwtl1UVsWbrxZKEgH1sNYSMVjWJLFQ ptTrVT4Ynk3dEysK2Rhe9JbWKVpvzvZymRcjFij/AeJEEVqniZUrWyVCcZSIErrm idWX43XD8UNY5sKt451/EWSUx1H3mD2f8qq0ESHlCaxmENxdrEgeX5tnlomaEcaX Ew0etJY2Kdm0jcq9Sb1kDqAuuc1lB3OQXOu5XPdxXjKtd4zjIZCaeVwmmv4Hq3wQ i8LGmAaFtxUDJn26xeK4 =zpaE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4CLjpLf31urx1k0hIUKAfumFJmIbvwK9m-- --===============9069051232080149002== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============9069051232080149002==--