On 28/02/2024 8:27 am, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 27.02.2024 15:57, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> Looking at the XenServer patchqueue, a couple to consider but nothing >> jumps out as critically urgent. >> >> b6cf604207fd and 098d868e52ac as oxenstored perf fixes, although there's >> one incremental (non-functional) fix I'm still waiting on an ack on. >> The backport to 4.18 is trivial. The backport to 4.17 is miserable but >> I've already done it. > I wouldn't normally consider such for backport, but I'm not opposed if the > oxenstore maintainers agree (now Cc-ed) and if I can leave putting in these > two backports to you.
I'm not overly fussed. On our side, it came in as a bug, but we also have scalability limits specified where upstream Xen doesn't. >> cf7fe8b72dea which is the CPUID rescan on microcode load. > This is already there on the 4.18 branch, and it isn't applicable to the > upstream 4.17 one (I assume you did backport the commit referenced in the > Fixes: tag to your XenServer tree). Ah yes. The rescan raw patch has been in our patchqueue since 2018, and I keep on forgetting how poor we are at getting that work complete. Sorry for the noise. ~Andrew
