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

[Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 15:18 +0100 on 08 Jul (1278602309), 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? 

Or, if we're taking some mechanism out, couldn't we take _all_ the
mechanism out?  The idea of a stub domain doesn't seem like one that
libxl necessarily needs to know about.

Tim.

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

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