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] Re: Timeout connecting to device

On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:17:18AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 11:37 +0100, Christian Limpach wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 10:27:06AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > A slight variation on this would be to have the tools create the
> > > "setting-up" node, and the driver delete it when it's happy.
> > > 
> > > I want to leave the error node on every error, so that way you can tell
> > > if it can't read the backend because of permission problem or something,
> > > even if during setup.
> > 
> > How do you tell if an error is final though?  Removing the setting-up
> > node sounds kind of misleading since the device is not done setting-up.
> > I think we need to indicate somehow whether an error is final or
> > transient, but I don't think we should require the format of the
> > error message to somehow indicate this.
> I don't think the frontend can, in general, tell the difference between
> a final error and a transient one.  The problem may simply be that the
> backend never creates a node we need.  If we're completely giving up, we
> could remove the setting-up node, but I'm not sure it's worth it?

There are error which are final, like a node which holds data which doesn't
make sense (like when scanf "%d" fails).  Yes, there are some where you
can't tell if they are transient or final...  I guess the fatal ones I
think about are not very likely if the frontend and backend are matched
and not broken...


Xen-devel mailing list