[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] libxl stubdom API cleanup



On 08/07/10 15:18, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 15:03 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
On 07/07/10 17:53, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
I though we wanted to make stubdoms transparent to libxenlight users,
why do you want to expose them now?

   From the users yes, from the libxenlight users (aka developers) no.
It's also a good way to get the policy out of libxenlight. For example the
32mb value which might or might not change in future.

Fair enough.
I ack the whole series then.

Is it necessary to pull the mechanism out along with the policy though?

Necessary is quite a strong word.

Could the libxl user not specify one of nostubdom, stubdom or
libxlchooses (the default?) and let the internals of libxl take care of
actually starting it etc?

Starting a stubdom or not, imply 2 very different side effects (e.g. memory wise). Separating the API give better error reporting, more room for action (e.g. creating a domain without stubdom if you don't have those N mb to spare), and it also simplify the ocaml bindings not having to encode complex semantics on the ocaml side.

--
Vincent

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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.