Re: [PATCH] [104/223] KVM: Write protect memory after slot swap

[Paul Gortmaker]

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/13/2010 11:12 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>> >  - Greg rejects kvm patches (but not virtio etc) pointing submitters
>> >  to the kvm maintainers
>> >  - The kvm maintainers collect stable kvm patches and autotest them
>>
>> As I understand this patch came in this way for .36
>> (I took it from .36-stable)
>
> The patch was autotested for .36-stable, it wasn't autotested for
> .35-stable.  It will very likely work (this isn't code that changes a lot),
> but still.
>
>> >  - They then submit the patches to stable@
>>
>> Do you want to do the autotest explicitely for .35 too and no automatic
>> backports and do the same procedure as for newer kernels?
>>
>> I can do that, but you would need to do it for a long time.
>
> Yes.  In fact it gets more important as time goes by, since as time goes by
> patches are more likely to cause regressions due to changes in the code
> base.

My workflow is largely the same as Andi's -- in that I'm using patches that
have already been nominated for other stable releases and putting them
on the 34-lt (longterm) as appropriate.  Are you interested in also doing the
same thing for 34-lt (i.e. you generating a 34 specific, pre-tested patchset
instead of me doing the backports from other stable trees?)

Thanks,
Paul.

>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/