Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] public/io/netif.h: make control ring hash protocol more general

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 16 February 2016 11:11
> To: Paul Durrant
> Cc: Ian Campbell; Ian Jackson; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir
> (Xen.org); Tim (Xen.org)
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] public/io/netif.h: make control ring hash protocol
> more general
> 
> >>> On 16.02.16 at 12:02, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: 16 February 2016 10:23
> >> On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 11:14 +0000, Paul Durrant wrote:
> >> > + */
> >> > +#ifdef NETIF_DEFINE_TOEPLITZ
> >>
> >> If we go with this then this should have an addtional XEN_ on the
> >> front.
> >
> > The header is inconsistent at the moment. Some things are prefixed with
> XEN_
> > some are not so if you want this prefixed then I think it's best I add
> > another patch before this to change all unqualified netif/NETIF occurrences
> > to xen_netif/XEN_NETIF... it will also mean less post-processing when I
> > re-import the header into Linux.
> 
> You'd need to be rather careful here: Any such identifiers which
> were there already in 4.6 (or any other release) would have to
> remain unchanged.

Is that true? The Linux header is quite different (in that everything is 
already prefixed) and I was assuming any user of the header file would have to 
have an explicit 'import into frontend/backend repo' step where compatibility 
could be fixed up.

  Paul

> For any new ones adding prefixes would
> indeed seem very desirable.
> 
> Jan


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