| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC] tmem ABI change... backwards compatibility unneces
|
To: |
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC] tmem ABI change... backwards compatibility unnecessary? |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:39:08 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
Vasiliy G Tolstov <v.tolstov@xxxxxxxxx>, "Xen-Devel \(xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\)" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, tmem-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Kurt Hackel <kurt.hackel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, stephen.spector@xxxxxxxxxx, Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:40:03 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<c84f89c9-34ae-4599-9f1e-90ed84dfa837@default> |
|
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> |
|
References: |
<1e601c02-1f50-4396-b4d1-e1e21ebf3dc8@default 4C7E87970200007800013C2C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <c84f89c9-34ae-4599-9f1e-90ed84dfa837@default> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100806 Fedora/3.1.2-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.1.2 |
On 09/02/2010 04:19 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> OK, I will submit a patch tomorrow with the following characteristics:
>
> v0 (current) hypervisor + v0 guest: succeeds
> v1 (patched) hypervisor + v1 guest: succeeds
> v0 (current) hypervisor + v1 guest: fails
> v1 (patched) hypervisor + v0 guest: fails
>
> where fails is an xm dmesg message that says "unsupported
> spec version" when the guest attempts to create a pool.
> And pool creation failure ensures that all further tmem
> operations also fail (indeed never even result in a
> hypercall for most tmem-enabled kernels).
>
> Thank goodness ABI versioning was built into tmem from
> the beginning!
Hm, I'm not really a big fan of having a single "ABI version". It
always seems better to have individual calls which can be
augmented/replaced by new calls, and/or have capability flags to extend
the ABI. Versions mean you end up being stuck doing updates in a very
coarse-grained way, and the long-term support gets very onerous.
(Microsoft ABIs are a good antipattern to avoid, especially DirectX.)
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home