This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [qemu] xen_be_init under stubdom

To: Kamala Narasimhan <kamala.narasimhan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [qemu] xen_be_init under stubdom
From: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:04:04 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:04:41 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <AANLkTikFbHCUmSceFR=byYRV+q5j9TnN8_bab6LKUSpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Newsgroups: chiark.mail.xen.devel
References: <AANLkTikFbHCUmSceFR=byYRV+q5j9TnN8_bab6LKUSpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kamala Narasimhan writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] [qemu] xen_be_init under 
> Do nothing in xen_be_init under stubdom plus a minor inconsequential cleanup.
> -       goto cleanup;
> +        return;
> -cleanup:
>      qemu_free(vec);
>  }

I don't think this is a helpful change.  There is nothing wrong with
calling qemu_free(0) and IMO in general functions that "goto cleanup"
are to be preferred to ones that "return".

Furthermore, even if this patch were good, it's not a bugfix so is not
acceptable at this stage of the release.

> @@ -646,6 +645,10 @@ static void xen_be_evtchn_event(void *opaque)
>  int xen_be_init(void)
>  {
> +    return 0;
> +#endif

I don't understand this at all.  Why should stubdom not be able to
make pv backends if it wants to ?  I agree that it probably doesn't
want to but if something iswrongly causing it to then the right fix is
to make it not do so.


Xen-devel mailing list