Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/2] tools/libxc: Improved xc_{topology, numa}info functions.

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 10:41 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> If there general agreement that making the old
> xc_{topology,numa}info() functions have the prototype and behaviour of
> my _bounced variants, then I will happy do that,

I think that is the correct thing to do, thanks.

In general hiding the bouncing inside libxc is nicer for everyone I
think, unless they are called incredibly frequently (like the inner loop
of a migrate), I don't think these fit that profile

The only question is whether the function params should explode
xc_topology_info or whether that struct should be redefined without
guest handles for the callers to use (bouncing into the matching fields
in xen_sysctl_topologyinfo_t). That's up to you, I assume it will become
obvious which to pick when you look at the callers.

> and send some fixup to make libxl work against it.

and Python's xc bindings too I'm afraid.

Ian.


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