linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 582 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c between commit
02e031cbc843b010e72fcc05c76113c688b2860f ("block: remove
REQ_HARDBARRIER") from Linus' tree and commits
c64e38ea17a81721da0393584fd807f8434050fa ("xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH
into a full barrier") and be2f8373c188ed1f5d36003c9928e4d695213080
("xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER") from the xen
tree.

I used the xen tree version.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 11/14/2010 04:23 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c between commit
> 02e031cbc843b010e72fcc05c76113c688b2860f ("block: remove
> REQ_HARDBARRIER") from Linus' tree and commits
> c64e38ea17a81721da0393584fd807f8434050fa ("xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH
> into a full barrier") and be2f8373c188ed1f5d36003c9928e4d695213080
> ("xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER") from the xen
> tree.
>
> I used the xen tree version.

I'll drop that because you should be seeing those changes come via Jens.

    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jens Axboe]

On 2010-11-15 22:04, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 11/14/2010 04:23 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c between commit
>> 02e031cbc843b010e72fcc05c76113c688b2860f ("block: remove
>> REQ_HARDBARRIER") from Linus' tree and commits
>> c64e38ea17a81721da0393584fd807f8434050fa ("xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH
>> into a full barrier") and be2f8373c188ed1f5d36003c9928e4d695213080
>> ("xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER") from the xen
>> tree.
>>
>> I used the xen tree version.
> 
> I'll drop that because you should be seeing those changes come via Jens.

Yep, since Linus pulled the last batch, for-linus now has the next bits
(which include the xen barrier set).

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 11/15/2010 01:07 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2010-11-15 22:04, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> On 11/14/2010 04:23 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
>>> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c between commit
>>> 02e031cbc843b010e72fcc05c76113c688b2860f ("block: remove
>>> REQ_HARDBARRIER") from Linus' tree and commits
>>> c64e38ea17a81721da0393584fd807f8434050fa ("xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH
>>> into a full barrier") and be2f8373c188ed1f5d36003c9928e4d695213080
>>> ("xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER") from the xen
>>> tree.
>>>
>>> I used the xen tree version.
>> I'll drop that because you should be seeing those changes come via Jens.
> Yep, since Linus pulled the last batch, for-linus now has the next bits
> (which include the xen barrier set).

These don't seem to be in -rc3.  Did they get dropped on the ground
somewhere?

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git upstream/blkfront

Jeremy Fitzhardinge (4):
      xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH into a full barrier
      xen/blkfront: change blk_shadow.request to proper pointer
      xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER
      xen/blkfront: cope with backend that fail empty BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER requests

 drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c |   55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

Thanks,
	J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jens Axboe]

On 2010-11-22 21:15, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 01:07 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2010-11-15 22:04, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>> On 11/14/2010 04:23 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
>>>> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c between commit
>>>> 02e031cbc843b010e72fcc05c76113c688b2860f ("block: remove
>>>> REQ_HARDBARRIER") from Linus' tree and commits
>>>> c64e38ea17a81721da0393584fd807f8434050fa ("xen/blkfront: map REQ_FLUSH
>>>> into a full barrier") and be2f8373c188ed1f5d36003c9928e4d695213080
>>>> ("xen/blkfront: Implement FUA with BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER") from the xen
>>>> tree.
>>>>
>>>> I used the xen tree version.
>>> I'll drop that because you should be seeing those changes come via Jens.
>> Yep, since Linus pulled the last batch, for-linus now has the next bits
>> (which include the xen barrier set).
> 
> These don't seem to be in -rc3.  Did they get dropped on the ground
> somewhere?

No, they are in for-linus as written above. Just not shipped off yet,
will be soon.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 11/22/2010 12:17 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I'll drop that because you should be seeing those changes come via Jens.
>>> Yep, since Linus pulled the last batch, for-linus now has the next bits
>>> (which include the xen barrier set).
>> These don't seem to be in -rc3.  Did they get dropped on the ground
>> somewhere?
> No, they are in for-linus as written above. Just not shipped off yet,
> will be soon.

No problem, I was just following up on everything outstanding for upstream.

Thanks,
    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 594 bytes --]

Hi Jeremy,

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:44:18 +1100 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
>
> On 01/12/2012 08:29 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > Are you by some chance still (or again) pulling from my
> > "git://github.com/jsgf/linux-xen.git upstream/xen" repo, which
> > contains a number of obsolete changes...
> 
> Which looks like my mistake, because I don't think I had asked you to
> switch back to git.kernel.org.

OK, I will switch back to kernel.org today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 01/12/2012 08:29 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Are you by some chance still (or again) pulling from my
> "git://github.com/jsgf/linux-xen.git upstream/xen" repo, which
> contains a number of obsolete changes...

Which looks like my mistake, because I don't think I had asked you to
switch back to git.kernel.org.

Thanks,
    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 01/11/2012 02:57 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/xen/Kconfig between commit 10fe570fc167 ("Revert "xen/debug:
> WARN_ON when identity PFN has no _PAGE_IOMAP flag set."") from Linus'
> tree and commit 23757fb5d678 ("xen: add CPU microcode update driver")
> from the xen tree.
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.

Do you know which branch this is coming from?  Are you by some chance
still (or again) pulling from my "git://github.com/jsgf/linux-xen.git
upstream/xen" repo, which contains a number of obsolete changes,
including the microcode stuff (now removed)?

I just created a new (empty)
"git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git
upstream/linux-next" branch; could you make sure that replaces any other
branch you have from either kernel.org xen.git or github.com/jsgf/linux-xen?

Thanks,
    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Ingo Molnar]

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/xen/Kconfig between commit 10fe570fc167 ("Revert "xen/debug:
> WARN_ON when identity PFN has no _PAGE_IOMAP flag set."") from Linus'
> tree and commit 23757fb5d678 ("xen: add CPU microcode update driver")
> from the xen tree.
> 
> Just context changes.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> 
> diff --cc arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
> index fdce49c,4d04d4f..0000000
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
> @@@ -50,3 -50,14 +50,6 @@@ config XEN_DEBUG_F
>   	  Enable statistics output and various tuning options in debugfs.
>   	  Enabling this option may incur a significant performance overhead.
>   
>  -config XEN_DEBUG
>  -	bool "Enable Xen debug checks"
>  -	depends on XEN
>  -	default n
>  -	help
>  -	  Enable various WARN_ON checks in the Xen MMU code.
>  -	  Enabling this option WILL incur a significant performance overhead.
>  -
> + config MICROCODE_XEN
> +        def_bool y
> +        depends on XEN_DOM0 && MICROCODE

Jeremy, Konrad, the current Xen microcode crap was objected to 
early last year by the people developing the x86 microcode 
subsystem - still you have put it into the Xen tree, without 
even Cc:-ing the people involved!

To make it even clearer, because you don't seem to be able to 
follow the proper upstream workflow unless forced to:

 NAKed-By: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

Please remove it from the Xen tree until the proper agreeement 
is reached.

Thanks,

	Ingo

linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1101 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
arch/x86/xen/Kconfig between commit 10fe570fc167 ("Revert "xen/debug:
WARN_ON when identity PFN has no _PAGE_IOMAP flag set."") from Linus'
tree and commit 23757fb5d678 ("xen: add CPU microcode update driver")
from the xen tree.

Just context changes.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
index fdce49c,4d04d4f..0000000
--- a/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig
@@@ -50,3 -50,14 +50,6 @@@ config XEN_DEBUG_F
  	  Enable statistics output and various tuning options in debugfs.
  	  Enabling this option may incur a significant performance overhead.
  
 -config XEN_DEBUG
 -	bool "Enable Xen debug checks"
 -	depends on XEN
 -	default n
 -	help
 -	  Enable various WARN_ON checks in the Xen MMU code.
 -	  Enabling this option WILL incur a significant performance overhead.
 -
+ config MICROCODE_XEN
+        def_bool y
+        depends on XEN_DOM0 && MICROCODE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 472 bytes --]

Hi Jeremy,

On Wed, 18 May 2011 07:33:46 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
>
> On 05/18/2011 05:32 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Perhaps resetting your branch to some commit on Linus tree in the
> > meantime would mean Stephen doesn't have to see it everyday?
> 
> Ah, good point.  I've reset it back to v2.6.38 for now.

Thanks for that.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 05/18/2011 05:32 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 12:15 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> On 05/17/2011 04:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:05:44 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
>>>> drivers/xen/Kconfig, drivers/xen/gntdev.c and include/xen/gntdev.h
>>>> between various commits Linus' tree and various commits from the xen tree.
>>>>
>>>> As previously discussed, I have dropped the xen tree for today (as it
>>>> contains an older version of the changes that were merged into Linus'
>>>> tree).
>>> Just wondering if the xen tree is ever going to make a reappearance in
>>> linux-next?
>> Konrad's tree has the bulk of the xen work in it at the moment.  I'm
>> doing to start on a few bits and pieces, but I've not decided if I'll
>> put them into linux-next myself or just push them via Konrad.
>>
>> So, maybe, but maybe not.
> Perhaps resetting your branch to some commit on Linus tree in the
> meantime would mean Stephen doesn't have to see it everyday?

Ah, good point.  I've reset it back to v2.6.38 for now.

    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Ian Campbell]

On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 12:15 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 04:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Jeremy,
> >
> > On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:05:44 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> >> drivers/xen/Kconfig, drivers/xen/gntdev.c and include/xen/gntdev.h
> >> between various commits Linus' tree and various commits from the xen tree.
> >>
> >> As previously discussed, I have dropped the xen tree for today (as it
> >> contains an older version of the changes that were merged into Linus'
> >> tree).
> > Just wondering if the xen tree is ever going to make a reappearance in
> > linux-next?
> 
> Konrad's tree has the bulk of the xen work in it at the moment.  I'm
> doing to start on a few bits and pieces, but I've not decided if I'll
> put them into linux-next myself or just push them via Konrad.
> 
> So, maybe, but maybe not.

Perhaps resetting your branch to some commit on Linus tree in the
meantime would mean Stephen doesn't have to see it everyday?

Ian.
-- 
Ian Campbell
Current Noise: Devin Townsend - Away

In an orderly world, there's always a place for the disorderly.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 05/17/2011 04:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:05:44 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/xen/Kconfig, drivers/xen/gntdev.c and include/xen/gntdev.h
>> between various commits Linus' tree and various commits from the xen tree.
>>
>> As previously discussed, I have dropped the xen tree for today (as it
>> contains an older version of the changes that were merged into Linus'
>> tree).
> Just wondering if the xen tree is ever going to make a reappearance in
> linux-next?

Konrad's tree has the bulk of the xen work in it at the moment.  I'm
doing to start on a few bits and pieces, but I've not decided if I'll
put them into linux-next myself or just push them via Konrad.

So, maybe, but maybe not.

Thanks,
    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 666 bytes --]

Hi Jeremy,

On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:05:44 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> drivers/xen/Kconfig, drivers/xen/gntdev.c and include/xen/gntdev.h
> between various commits Linus' tree and various commits from the xen tree.
> 
> As previously discussed, I have dropped the xen tree for today (as it
> contains an older version of the changes that were merged into Linus'
> tree).

Just wondering if the xen tree is ever going to make a reappearance in
linux-next?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 474 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
drivers/xen/Kconfig, drivers/xen/gntdev.c and include/xen/gntdev.h
between various commits Linus' tree and various commits from the xen tree.

As previously discussed, I have dropped the xen tree for today (as it
contains an older version of the changes that were merged into Linus'
tree).
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
arch/x86/xen/mmu.c between commit
fef5ba797991f9335bcfc295942b684f9bf613a1 ("xen: Cope with unmapped pages
when initializing kernel pagetable") from Linus' tree and commit
41f2e4771a4f1ba26c35438daf32917b9ef7858d ("xen: add support for PAT")
from the xen tree.

Just context changes.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc arch/x86/xen/mmu.c
index f72d18c,6ba8f8a..0000000
--- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c
@@@ -56,7 -55,7 +56,8 @@@
  #include <asm/e820.h>
  #include <asm/linkage.h>
  #include <asm/page.h>
 +#include <asm/init.h>
+ #include <asm/pat.h>
  
  #include <asm/xen/hypercall.h>
  #include <asm/xen/hypervisor.h>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

  On 07/26/2010 08:32 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c between commit
> ff4878089e1eaeac79d57878ad4ea32910fb4037 ("x86: Do not try to disable
> hpet if it hasn't been initialized before") from Linus' tree and commit
> ef7612e63eafaa6101f5d3185ed8d9bf232ba627 ("x86: Do not try to disable
> hpet if it hasn't been initialized before") from the xen tree.
>
> Two versions of the same patch.  I used the version from Linus' tree
> since it was dated later and had been modified by Thomas.

Thanks, I was waiting for that to land.  I'll drop it from my branch.

     J

linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 627 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in
arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c between commit
ff4878089e1eaeac79d57878ad4ea32910fb4037 ("x86: Do not try to disable
hpet if it hasn't been initialized before") from Linus' tree and commit
ef7612e63eafaa6101f5d3185ed8d9bf232ba627 ("x86: Do not try to disable
hpet if it hasn't been initialized before") from the xen tree.

Two versions of the same patch.  I used the version from Linus' tree
since it was dated later and had been modified by Thomas.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]