Re: [MirageOS-devel] towards a common Mirage 'FLOW' signature

[David Scott <scott.dj@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:02:16AM +0000, Dave Scott wrote:
> Hi,

> >> https://github.com/djs55/mirage/commit/87f9855f22f997264870f903c998b1d92186fdef
> >>
> >> In V2 of the API I'd like to turn the CONSOLE signature into a combination of DEVICE and FLOW.
> >
> > This looks good to me. ÂThe one caveat is why write cannot return an
> > error in the existing API. ÂIt is possible for the lower-level
> > transport to signal a hard error, although we rarely do so at the
> > moment. ÂIn the interests of future compatibility, should we make that
> > change?
>

> That?s a good point ? I can certainly imagine a hard error being

> reported (something like ECONNRESET?)
>
> How about this for a plan:
>

> 1. I?ll make a pull request for types V1 to add a FLOW, with errors on
> writes, which isn?t used anywhere and so shouldn?t break anything

> (unless the name FLOW shadows some other signature)
>

> 2. I?ll start making a list of API breaking changes we want to make for

> V2, including using FLOW everywhere (which means modifying all the

> write() functions). Perhaps I?ll start writing a V2 module?

Sounds good to me -- there's no reason why we can't just work on the V2
module types in trunk.

OK, I've made the following pull request which adds a FLOW signature. Note the 'write' and 'writev' now returnÂ

[`Ok of unit | `Eof | `Error of error ]

https://github.com/mirage/mirage/pull/248

Cheers,

Dave

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel