On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > > On 6/10/19 9:40 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > Hi Julien, > > > > Hi Stefano, > > > > > > > > I expressed my preference below. We don't agree. Is there anything else > > > you would like me to add to this thread? Do you have a specific > > > question? The only question I see below is "Users of what?" but I take > > > it was just rhetorical. > > > > No it wasn't rhetorical. It was a genuine question, because you are implying > > that: > > 1) It is possible to have user that are using AIVIVT > > 2) We have to support out of tree users > > > > The latter is particularly critical as this implies that any change in Xen > > should be done with keeping in mind any patches that could be applied on top > > of Xen. > > > > So I am all hear of your arguments here... At the end, we need to come to an > > agreement here as at the moment my patch can't go without your ack. > > No, we don't have to support out of tree users. I didn't mean to imply > it. But it costs us very little to be courteous and polite in cases like > this, sending a more obvious [ANNOUNCE] email saying "we are dropping > AIVIVT as nobody should be using it". > > Can this patch go in regardless? I wouldn't be happy about it, but if > this was a vote it would be a -1, not a -2. It is difficult to give an > ack for a thing I don't like, but I wouldn't go as far as nacking it.
On second thought, this patch should not be gated by an announce email, and given the scarcity of AIVIVT platforms, it is not worth the effort. Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
