| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 00/35] Xen i386 paravirtualization support
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 07:49:37AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
Congrats on getting this thrashed out. A few comments, most of which are
boring style nits, but nonetheless ... will try to take a proper look
later.
General comment:
Why is this style used:
HYPERVISOR_foo_bar ?
ie the capitalization of HYPERVISOR. Doesn't seem to fit with the rest
of the kernel style.
It's also wrong. There's more than one hypervisor and Xen shouldn't just
grab this namespace. make it xen_ or xenhv_.
I think the intent was to create something generic enough for others to
use. There were other projects that already intended to use the same
model ... and please, lets not have one stack of this stuff for each
hypervisor. So in general, I think the approach is correct, I was just
whining about style stuff ;-)
M.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
| <Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 05/35] Add sync bitops, (continued)
- [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 00/35] Xen i386 paravirtualization support,
Martin J. Bligh <=
|
|
|
| |
|
Home