[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver.

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave Boutcher wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:00:33 -0700, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> > The block device frontend driver allows the kernel to access block
> > devices exported exported by a virtual machine containing a physical
> > block device driver.
> First, I think this belongs in drivers/block (and the network driver
> belongs in drivers/net).  If we're going to bring xen to the party,
> lets not leave it hiding out in a corner.
Strongly agreed.


> > +static void connect(struct blkfront_info *);
> > +static void blkfront_closing(struct xenbus_device *);
> > +static int blkfront_remove(struct xenbus_device *);
> > +static int talk_to_backend(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
> > +static int setup_blkring(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
> > +
> > +static void kick_pending_request_queues(struct blkfront_info *);
> > +
> > +static irqreturn_t blkif_int(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs *ptregs);
> > +static void blkif_restart_queue(void *arg);
> > +static void blkif_recover(struct blkfront_info *);
> > +static void blkif_completion(struct blk_shadow *);
> > +static void blkif_free(struct blkfront_info *, int);
> I'm pretty sure you can rearrange the code to get rid of the forward
> references. 
I've never thought this was useful...  If the function ordering helps 
the human...

> > +       switch (backend_state) {
> > +       case XenbusStateUnknown:
> > +       case XenbusStateInitialising:
> > +       case XenbusStateInitWait:
> > +       case XenbusStateInitialised:
> > +       case XenbusStateClosed:
> This actually should get fixed elsewhere, but SillyCaps???
Agreed.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel