All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com>
To: "wei.liu2@citrix.com" <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"Han, Huaitong" <huaitong.han@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Xen 4.7 Development Update
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:54:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAE05AB-9FD9-45B2-B61C-D30DE068EC48@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1448417874.4046.10.camel@intel.com>

Wei,
and others.

> On 25 Nov 2015, at 02:17, Han, Huaitong <huaitong.han@intel.com> wrote:
>> 
>> = Projects =
> 
> == Hypervisor ==
> === x86 ===
> *Memory protection keys for user pages
> -Huaitong Han

one thing I struggle with (and I am probably not the only one), is that it is not always easy do find out what a specific patch does in the Development Update mails. Obviously this is not an issue at the beginning of the cycle, but it can become one when we start to put the release notes and PR together. In this particular case, the use-case for the feature was described as a one-liner else-where and I am wondering, whether we should allow tracking the use/use-case/... in these mails.

Aka, in this case, using the information from the thread where the use-case was discussed, will give us something like ...  

== Hypervisor ==
=== x86 ===
* Memory protection keys for user pages
  (allows threads to cooperatively prevent themselves from "trampling" on each other, which increases robustness and is useful for debugging)
- Huaitong Han

Part of the reason, why I am also looking at this, is because of the Feature Lifecycle Management (see http://xen.markmail.org/message/uu3vifjmv2qylds4), where we still have outstanding issues on documenting completed features. It seems to me that there is an overlap between the Development Update mails, and recording the state of an added feature in a central file. Obviously, if a new feature was committed to xen.git, we would then need to add an entry to the still to be defined central file describing it. And it would probably make sense to keep the info in Development Update mails as close as possible to what is in the still to be defined file.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Lars 

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-01 11:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-09 16:15 Xen 4.7 Development Update Wei Liu
2015-11-09 16:49 ` Wei Liu
2015-11-10  1:08 ` Xu, Quan
2015-11-10  4:28 ` Juergen Gross
2015-11-11 14:24 ` Anthony PERARD
2015-11-11 14:36 ` Haozhong Zhang
2015-11-25  2:17 ` Han, Huaitong
2015-12-01 11:54   ` Lars Kurth [this message]
2015-12-01 12:35     ` Wei Liu
2015-12-01 12:42       ` Ian Campbell
2015-12-01 12:46         ` Wei Liu
2015-12-01 13:32     ` Yong Wang
2015-12-01 10:34 Wei Liu
2016-01-04 10:15 Wei Liu
2016-01-05  6:57 ` Chun Yan Liu
2016-01-06 13:52   ` Jan Beulich
2016-01-05 14:15 ` Haozhong Zhang
2016-01-05 14:30 ` Meng Xu
2016-01-05 14:34   ` Wei Liu
2016-01-05 16:03     ` Meng Xu
2016-01-07  5:41 ` Haozhong Zhang
2016-01-07 10:21   ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-07 11:52     ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-01 10:45 Wei Liu
2016-02-01 12:11 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-01 12:19   ` Wei Liu
2016-02-02  7:38     ` Shuai Ruan
2016-02-03  8:55 ` Haozhong Zhang
2016-02-03  9:36 ` Han, Huaitong
2016-02-03 12:22 ` Olaf Hering
2016-02-29 11:17 Wei Liu
2016-02-29 11:44 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-29 11:50   ` Wei Liu
2016-02-29 13:27 ` Meng Xu
2016-03-01 22:01   ` Dario Faggioli
2016-02-29 15:35 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-03-01 10:44   ` Wei Liu
2016-03-02  1:26 ` Han, Huaitong
2016-03-02  3:13 ` Wu, Feng
2016-03-02  5:31 ` Haozhong Zhang
2016-03-02  7:40 ` Shuai Ruan
2016-03-02 11:38 ` George Dunlap
2016-03-02 13:32   ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-02 14:07     ` Paul Durrant
2016-03-02 14:20       ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-02 14:29         ` Paul Durrant
2016-03-02 14:43     ` George Dunlap
2016-03-02 15:07       ` Wei Liu
2016-03-02 14:40 ` Xu, Quan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAAE05AB-9FD9-45B2-B61C-D30DE068EC48@gmail.com \
    --to=lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com \
    --cc=huaitong.han@intel.com \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.