Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 6/8] docs: documentation about static shared memory regions

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ian,

I am replying here, but I am addressing also your other emails. This is
v8 of the series, the first version was sent in Aug 2017, and the design
document, including the master/slave terminology, was accepted even
before that.

At this stage I am only looking for minor suggestions for improvements.
I am not going to address a v1-style review at this point.


On Tue, 30 Oct 2018, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > diff --git a/docs/man/xl-static-shm-configuration.pod.5 
> > b/docs/man/xl-static-shm-configuration.pod.5
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..81ff3f1
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/docs/man/xl-static-shm-configuration.pod.5
> ...
> > +* Uniquely identified by a string that is no longer than 128 characters, 
> > which
> > +is called an B<identifier> in this document.
> > +
> > +* Backed by exactly one domain, which is called a B<master> domain, and all
> > +the other domains who are also sharing this region are called B<slave>s.
> 
> Would it be possible to rename these concepts ?  Nowadays it is
> generally preferable to avoid master/slave terminology.  Perhaps
> `owning' and `borrowing' domains ?  I'm not sure exactly what the
> precise relationship is.  It would be good to explain that by
> explaining what the semantic difference is between the roles of the
> owning and borrowing domains.

I completely agree with you here, and getting rid of the master/slave
terminology would be nice, in retrospect, it was not a good choice. But
this is v8 of the series, and as discussed a few times, we encourage
reviewers to avoid this kind of requests at this stage.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel