[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] XSM SILO boot time spew

  • To: Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Xin Li (Talons)" <xin.li@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 03:03:58 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Cc: Xen-devel List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 03:04:23 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
  • Thread-index: AQHUcZAlsttEAYsbKEyobFDcDNeTHqVEHB0AgAEYuAA=
  • Thread-topic: XSM SILO boot time spew

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel De Graaf [mailto:dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 1:53 AM
> To: Xin Li (Talons) <xin.li@xxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Cooper
> <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Xen-devel List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: XSM SILO boot time spew

> If SILO is a good example of what a potential third XSM module would look 
> like,
> it's probably better to just remove the printing and allow the dummy module's
> hooks to fill in any null values in the xsm_operations structure.  The 
> printing
> part was written with FLASK and ACM in mind, which both intended to hook
> everything and might add new hooks without changing the other.
> Another possible solution would be to add a bool parameter to register_xsm
> that disables the warnings instead of checking the pointer value, but that 
> feels
> like overkill to me; we still only have two XSM modules.

OK. I will just remove the printing.

Best regards

Xin(Talons) Li
Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.