 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-tools
Re: [Xen-tools] [PATCH] Clean up dom_get() usage
| To: | Dan Smith <danms@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Xen-tools] [PATCH] Clean up dom_get() usage |
| From: | Christian Limpach <christian.limpach@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:22:14 +0100 |
| Cc: | Xen Tools Developers <xen-tools@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Developers <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivery-date: | Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:19:49 +0000 |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=dczGtf/Ov8r6d/1k7NWbEW8KDHKtg+wdJJ3wzwKbsuM7DX5U482pcYCoO3fa0s5W8Hk/iVTRVUtNIDI//vr7Js0Qe2yLS+VTkUJ3CVr6ULTZdl3voVLeyiAYBNdZNezzVqPIh2CluXnhwj9QXRtjXds+iFj8mWRi4OzboHLKv4M= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <87irx2xnf3.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-tools-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | Xen control tools developers <xen-tools.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-tools@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-tools>, <mailto:xen-tools-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-tools>, <mailto:xen-tools-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| References: | <87irx2xnf3.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xen-tools-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On 9/15/05, Dan Smith <danms@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The 1st hunk adds a random empty line, please avoid hunks like that in
the future.
> This patch adds sanity checks everywhere dom_get() is used.
I don't think the 3rd hunk is needed. It would make more sense to
have a patch which replaces the magic dom0 domid by a global variable
indicating the domid of the domain where xend is running.
> In the case of XendDomainInfo.update(), if we get None back from
> dom_get(), we destroy ourselves. I believe that this should be the
> desired behavior, but arguments to the contrary are welcome.
It's possibly a sensible behaviour, but I'd like to move away from
code which does stuff as a side effect. We don't want to end up with
countless places doing random actions just because they happen to
notice a state change first.
christian
_______________________________________________
Xen-tools mailing list
Xen-tools@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-tools
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make xend reject duplicates and rename zombies, Ted Kaczmarek |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-tools] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make xend reject duplicates and rename zombies, Christian Limpach |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-tools] [PATCH] Clean up dom_get() usage, Dan Smith |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-tools] [PATCH] Clean up dom_get() usage, Dan Smith |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
