|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver.
|
To: |
Dave Boutcher <boutcher@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver. |
|
From: |
Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:25:36 -0400 |
|
Cc: |
Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:26:14 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<17596.56260.541661.919437@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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: |
<20060718091807.467468000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060718091958.657332000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <17596.56260.541661.919437@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060614) |
Dave Boutcher wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:00:33 -0700, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
The block device frontend driver allows the kernel to access block
devices exported exported by a virtual machine containing a physical
block device driver.
First, I think this belongs in drivers/block (and the network driver
belongs in drivers/net). If we're going to bring xen to the party,
lets not leave it hiding out in a corner.
Strongly agreed.
+static void connect(struct blkfront_info *);
+static void blkfront_closing(struct xenbus_device *);
+static int blkfront_remove(struct xenbus_device *);
+static int talk_to_backend(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
+static int setup_blkring(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
+
+static void kick_pending_request_queues(struct blkfront_info *);
+
+static irqreturn_t blkif_int(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs *ptregs);
+static void blkif_restart_queue(void *arg);
+static void blkif_recover(struct blkfront_info *);
+static void blkif_completion(struct blk_shadow *);
+static void blkif_free(struct blkfront_info *, int);
I'm pretty sure you can rearrange the code to get rid of the forward
references.
I've never thought this was useful... If the function ordering helps
the human...
+ switch (backend_state) {
+ case XenbusStateUnknown:
+ case XenbusStateInitialising:
+ case XenbusStateInitWait:
+ case XenbusStateInitialised:
+ case XenbusStateClosed:
This actually should get fixed elsewhere, but SillyCaps???
Agreed.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home