WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Xen/ia64 presentation

To: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Xen/ia64 presentation
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 20:24:09 +0100
Cc: "Magenheimer, Dan \(HP Labs Fort Collins\)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:26:06 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <426FE40C.60102@xxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD535AFC4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <426FE40C.60102@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On 27 Apr 2005, at 20:12, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

Yeah, there are some artifacts and some cleanup would be good.
The typedef predates exec_domain (used to be a typedef of
struct domain) and I used it because I knew that exec_domain
was coming.  Personally, I prefer VCPU (virtual CPU) to exec_domain.

I've had the same thought actually... an "exec_domain" is really a
virtual CPU state, and having a separate vcpu_info_t is rather confusing.

However, I don't think it helps things to go renaming core structures in
arch code because it sounds better... :)

I think I agree that 'struct vcpu' is nicer than 'struct exec_domain'. exec_domain appears hardly at all at the hypervisor interface, and having two different terms used interchangeably within Xen itself is weird.

Another I can think of is cpuset vs. cpumask: I went with the former but I like the latter equally well and there is no good reason not to go with the Linux convention on this one.

Perhaps we should have a flag day to move to agreed consistent naming on some of these? The changes are trivially scriptable for the most part, but annoying for those with pending patches.

 -- Keir


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