Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 11/14] libxl: get and set soft affinity

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20/11/13 11:30, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 19:58 +0100, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > As per the mechanism used to amend the current API, I don't have a real
> > preference. Both me and George asked (in a previous thread) what
> > mechanism we should use, but we did not get much feedback at that time
> > (not complain, just summing up what has happened).
> Yes, sorry about that.
>
> > Right now, I think I just need for someone authoritative enough to
> > express his preference. You certainly qualify as such, but, if possible,
> > I'd like to see what the other Ian thinks too, as he's been quite deeply
> > involved in reviewing this interface.
> I think the major argument in favour of the LIBXL_API_VERSION based
> approach is that this is how we have dealt with all the previous such
> changes. Having a mixture of this and fooN interfaces seems to me to be
> worse that either option by itself.
Just to be clear -- if we bump the API number, then we have to do some 
#ifdef-ery to allow programs compiled against the old API to compile, right?
 -George


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