[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 4/5] libxl: check for dynamic device model start required
>>> On 3/25/2016 at 02:25 PM, in message <56F4D9D6.8030300@xxxxxxxx>, Juergen >>> Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 25/03/16 03:06, Chun Yan Liu wrote: > > > > > >>>> On 3/23/2016 at 08:24 PM, in message > > <1458735847-9448-5-git-send-email-jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross > > <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Add a service routine checking whether a device model must be started > >> after adding a device to a domain. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> tools/libxl/libxl.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > >> tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > >> tools/libxl/libxl_internal.h | 4 ++++ > >> tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c | 3 +++ > >> tools/libxl/libxl_pvusb.c | 6 ++++++ > >> 5 files changed, 39 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl.c b/tools/libxl/libxl.c > >> index dcd0951..2b4e36f 100644 > >> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl.c > >> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl.c > >> @@ -2084,6 +2084,9 @@ void libxl__device_vtpm_add(libxl__egc *egc, > >> uint32_t > > >> domid, > >> if (rc) goto out; > >> > >> DEVICE_ADD(vtpm, vtpms, domid, &vtpm_saved, COMPARE_DEVID, > >> &d_config); > >> + > >> + rc = libxl__dm_check_start(gc, &d_config, domid); > >> + if (rc) goto out; > >> } > > > > Why is this check put inside the if (aodev->update_json) { }? I think it's > > > a common > > check, so should move outside. > > It is the only case where the check makes sense: update_json isn't set > when we are just creating the domain, in which case the test for the > device model needed is already in place. See. That's OK then. Thanks, Chunyan > When the device is added to an > already running domain update_json will always be true. > > > Juergen > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |