[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.5 v6 05/16] tools: Add vmware_port support

On 09/25/2014 12:24 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 12:31 -0400, Don Slutz wrote:
On 09/23/14 08:20, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 12:42 -0400, Don Slutz wrote:
The latter would allow moving to buildinfo.u.hvm, which would be nicer
from the libxl PoV, I think.
I could not find "buildinfo.u.hvm":

dcs-xen-54:~/xen>git grep buildinfo.u.hvm

So unable to comment.
It's in the idl, next to createinfo.
I take that to mean:

libxl_domain_config = Struct("domain_config", [
      ("c_info", libxl_domain_create_info),
      ("b_info", libxl_domain_build_info),



    Currently I do not know of a way to
say "set vmware_hw to 7
if vmware_port is true and vmware_hw is not specified".
That's an error case, isn't it? Or at least a vmware_port is ignored
Nope.  But I will agree that I have not done a lot with 3 (at least)
state booleans.  The 3 states being true, false, and not specified.
The third state is "default" as in: libxl sets something sensible based
on other criteria (internal choice, other settings etc).

And vmware_port is not ignored.

What I suggested was "if vmware_hw is non-zero then set vmware_port".

I am reading that as "set vmware_port if not specified".  To avoid
complexity, I am treating vmware_hw as a boolean.  Using this
I get the following table:

_hw   _port
   0     0        Just like today
   1     0        Only cpuid leaves change -- very unlikey
   1     1        Full VMware mode
   0     1        VMware hyper call mode.

Adding U for unspecified:

_hw   _port
   U     U        ==> _hw=0 _port=0
   0     U        ==> _hw=0 _port=0
   1     U        The case in question.
   U     0        ==> _hw=0 _port=0
   U     1        What I was talking about.
   0     0        Just like today
   1     0        Only cpuid leaves change -- very unlikey
   1     1        Full VMware mode
   0     1        VMware hyper call mode.

The problem here is that vmware_hw is not a boolean and there is
currently not a value that lets you know it has not been specified.
The unspecified value is 0, surely? All of the rows with U under _hw can
be ignored, I am talking only about _port being a defbool.

You asked Don to add "vmware_hw != 0 => vmware_port ?= 1" (Where ?= is like make, "set if not already set"). Don then naturally thought maybe you might want to do the opposite: ("vmware_port != 0 => vmware_hw ?= 7"). That's what Don is talking about with vmware_hw not being a boolean: he can't tell the difference between:



[nothing about vmware_hw]

In my other e-mail, I suggest that we make vmware_hw the "primary" configuration thing, and not even suggest using vmware_port unless they want one of the "unusual" configurations.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.