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

[Wen Congyang <wency@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/05/2016 01:00 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 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) ?

Another question: what should be renamed? The function name or the type name
or both?

Thanks
Wen Congyang

> 
> What do you think ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ian.
> 
> 
> .
> 




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