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


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: added libxl compatibility with physical b

To: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: added libxl compatibility with physical backend file for NetBSD
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:54:25 +0100
Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 06:55:03 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4E297F1C.5020304@xxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc.
References: <CAPLaKK5QW_PiGcKcKoH-g4VF8zM_VFmpjGiuW5DbNN9kHeMXJg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1311341983.12772.66.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E297F1C.5020304@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 14:46 +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > The checks on LIBXL_DISK_FORMAT_EMPTY and S_ISBLK are not really
> related
> > so I would not combine them even though the return is the same.
> > Otherwise the HAVE_PHY_BACKEND_FILE_SUPPORT change itself looks ok
> >
> > What is DONT_REMOVE_VBD_FROM_STORE for? Is this because xenbackendd
> does
> > it for you or something else?
> The hotplug script invoked by xenbackendd removes the vbd entry
> via xenstored-rm.

I thought that was something which was normally considered the
toolstack's job. Is there a special case for this in xend too?

We certainly need to retain some rm'ing of backend directories in the
toolstack in at least the forcible destroy code path, as opposed to the
graceful shutdown case.


Xen-devel mailing list