Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] passthrough: give XEN_DOMCTL_test_assign_device more sane semantics

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 22/06/17 08:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
> No - I'm open to any change to it which makes the currently ignored
> argument no longer ignored, without breaking existing (known and
> unknown) callers of the libxc wrapper. I.e. I'm in no way opposed to
> make it work the way you think it was originally meant to work; it is
> just that given its current use I've come to a different conclusion as
> to what the original intention may have been.

Actually, I think the clincher is this:

test_assign_device, assign_device, and deassign_device all use the same
structure.

That makes it pretty obvious that "test_assign_device" was meant to ask
the question, "If I call this hypercall with assign_device instead, will
it succeed or fail?"

 -George

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