Re: [Xen-devel] One question to lowlevel/xl/xl.c and lowlevel/xc/xc.c

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-03-24 at 18:31 +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> > NB, the libxl ones are broken and not even compiled right now, you can
> > ignore them.
> 
> Looks this is still compiled now.

xc is, xl is not, I am sure of that.

> > I don't know what the semantics of flag is, if it is per SBDF then I
> 
> Yes, this should be a flag specific to a SBDF.
> 
> You know, I'm working to fix RMRR completely. Based on some discussion 
> about that design ( I assume you may read that thread previously :) ), 
> now we probably need to pass a flag to introduce our policy.

Unless you have a concrete requirement to expose RMRR via the Python
bindings to libxc (i.e. you know somebody is using them) then I think
you should not bother.

Making RMRR work via the (C) interface to libxl used by xl and libvirt
is sufficient for a new in tree feature.

Ian.
> > suppose if you really wanted to expose this here then you would need to
> > invent some syntax for doing so.
> >
> 
> Definitely.
> 
> When I finish this I will send you to review technically.
> 
> Again, really appreciate your clarification to me.
> 
> Thanks
> Tiejun



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