Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] Add device_model_pvdevice parameter for HVM guests

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Campbell
> Sent: 02 August 2013 16:54
> To: Paul Durrant
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Stefano Stabellini; Ian Jackson
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Add device_model_pvdevice parameter for HVM
> guests
> 
> On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 16:48 +0100, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > > > So, doesn't LIBXL_HAVE_PVDEVICE cover it? The intention is there's
> > > > only ever going to be one of them.
> > >
> > > PVDEVICE is a very broad term, does it mean PVNIC, PVCONSOLE, PVDISK
> > > etc? How does it relate to a PVDOMAIN etc. I know we both know the
> > > answer to what this is but the API should be less ambiguous.
> > >
> >
> > How about VENDOR_DEVICE? That probably captures the intention (and
> > makes more sense when you consider the only available value apart
> > fromn 'none' is 'citrix').
> 
> vendor device sounds good to me.
> 
> Should be HVM_VENDOR_DEVICE though I think and it looks like we've
> fallen into the pattern of LIBXL_HAVE_<STRUCT>_<FIELD>, so how about
> LIBXL_HAVE_BUILDINFO_HVM_VENDOR_DEVICE? and
> u.hvm.vendor_device for the
> field itself?
> 

Sounds good to me. Patch v3 coming up.

  Paul
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel