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

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 6/6] xc_version: add vm_event interface version

To: "Petre Pircalabu" <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 09:27:45 -0700
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 16:27:55 +0000
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

>>> On 19.12.18 at 19:52, <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Petre Pircalabu <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

An empty description is not helpful. The immediate question is: Why?
We don't do this for other interface versions. I'm unconvinced a
special purpose piece of information like this one belongs into the
rather generic version hypercall.

Jan

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 6/6] xc_version: add vm_event interface version
  - From: Razvan Cojocaru

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 4/6] vm_event: Use slotted channels for sync requests.
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 6/6] xc_version: add vm_event interface version
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/AMD Split init_amd() into per-uarch helpers
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 6/6] xc_version: add vm_event interface version
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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