[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] libxl stubdom API cleanup
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 18:18 +0100, Vincent Hanquez wrote: > 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. Fair enough. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |