On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 01:02:59PM +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 3 Mar 2006, at 11:15, Horms wrote:
>
> >I have made a first pass at this, passing isfile as the data argument
> >to xc_ptrace() ATTACH. Its a little rough, but I wanted to get it out
> >for feedback before I head off for the day.
> >
> >There are 4 patches attached, which need to be applied in order.
> >Please let me know if posting patches in this way is a problem.
> >And of course, please let me know of any and all objections
> >so that I can refactor (or explain) accordingly.
>
> Yeah, diffstat tells me that you probably have the right approach (more
> lines deleted than added). I'd prefer fewer but bigger patches. e.g.,
> merge the first three 'cleanup' patches into one.
Here is the second round of patches. Please apply them in order.
The current split is a cleanup patch, followed by the consolidation
patch. Localy I actually have the cleanup patch broken out into the
error handling changes and other changes - as per the split in the
changelog entry. Let me know if you want me to send the broken out
patches.
I've done a little bit of testing, and I can trace both a core
and a running domain. Testing and feedback welcome.
--
Horms
35-libxc_cleanup.patch
Description: Text document
36-libxc_ptrace-consolidation.patch
Description: Text document
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home