[Xen-devel] [PATCHv10 0/9] Xen: extend kexec hypercall for use with pv-ops kernels
JBeulich at suse.com
Fri Nov 8 09:36:30 EST 2013
>>> On 08.11.13 at 15:01, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3 at citrix.com> wrote:
> On 08/11/13 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 08.11.13 at 14:13, David Vrabel <david.vrabel at citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Sorry, forgot to CC you on this series.
>>> Can we have your opinion on whether this kexec series can be merged?
>>> And if not, what further work and/or testing is required?
>> Just to clarify - unless I missed something, there was still no
>> review of this from Daniel or someone else known to be
>> familiar with the subject. If Keir gave his ack, formally this
>> could go in, but I wouldn't feel too well with that (the more
>> that apart from not having reviewed it, Daniel seems to also
>> continue to have problems with it).
> Can I have myself deemed to be familiar with the subject as far as this
> is concerned?
> A noticeable quantity of my contributions to Xen have been in the kexec
> / crash areas, and I am the author of the xen-crashdump-analyser.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you in any way. In fact David
and I briefly discussed this situation on the summit, and he sort
of understood that I consider your review valuable, but ...
> I do realise that I certainly not impartial as far as this series is
> concerned, being a co-developer.
... possibly/likely biased. Not the least because both of you work
for Citrix. I'm therefore rather after a second, really independent
Please forgive me not having expressed myself correctly.
More information about the kexec