Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] libxl: enabling upstream qemu as pure pv backend.

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > I don't think is a good idea to reset all these value to 0 here,
> > considering that the info parameter can be passed by the user.
> > It is better to use another libxl_device_model_info local variable and
> > just copy the very few fields we care about.
> > Otherwise in the stubdom case above you'll have the unwanted side effect
> > of removing useful informations of the stubdom from the structure.
> 
> I think ideally the struct would be the same for both the PV and FV qemu
> and the device model create would only pay attention to the bits which
> fit the scenario (i.e. the PV case would ignore vcpus != 0, not zero
> it).
> 
> This allows us to pass the same instance to both the PV and FV arg
> constructions routines in the stubdom+PV qemu case.

I wouldn't be opposed to it.
The reason I didn't suggest to make this change now is that I see a
certain argument to keep the vfb settings separate, considering that vfb
can be thought as implementation independent protocol.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel