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


[Xen-devel] Re: [patch/rfc] multiprotocol blkback drivers (32-on-64)

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch/rfc] multiprotocol blkback drivers (32-on-64)
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:20:38 +0100
Cc: Xen devel list <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:20:33 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4586D974.76E4.0078.0@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: <4586C426.8050101@xxxxxxx> <4586D974.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060911)
Jan Beulich wrote:
> I understand you favor this over the bi-modal approach I took? Any specific
> advantages? Jan

IMHO the code is more readable and I'd rate the chance to be accepted by
lkml review higher.  I don't like the approach to hide alot of the logic
in preprocessor magic.

It leaves the door open to add more protocols.  Not that I see a need
right now.  But maybe the lkml folks ask us to consolidate to some
struct layout which doesn't look different on different architectures
(i.e. sort struct members by size), then we maybe have to support a
third protocol ...


Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxx>

Xen-devel mailing list