Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v11 10/27] tools/libxl: add back channel support to write stream

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Changlong Xie writes ("[PATCH v11 10/27] tools/libxl: add back channel support 
to write stream"):
> From: Wen Congyang <wency@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Add back channel support to write stream. If the write stream is
> a back channel stream, this means the write stream is used by
> Secondary to send some records back.

The general idea seems fine to me but I want an opinion from Andrew.

If I'm not mistaken there is no call site for this yet.  In which case
this should be mentioned in the commit message.

> +/*----- checkpoint state -----*/
> +void libxl__stream_write_checkpoint_state(libxl__egc *egc,
> +                                          libxl__stream_write_state *stream,
> +                                          libxl_sr_checkpoint_state *srcs)

Firstly, missing blank line.

Secondly, reading all this leads me to think that maybe the
`checkpoint_state' record should be called something different.  Is it
only ever going to be used for COLO ?  Maybe it should be
`COLOHA_STATE' or something (and all the functions etc. renamed
consequently) ?

What do you think ?

Thanks,
Ian.

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