[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] xl block-attach


  • To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Kamala Narasimhan <kamala.narasimhan@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:10:33 -0500
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 07:12:03 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=HTz1VmemkFQJuWTFf/CJBzCddW3xiOqKtxESwcqM1YcH4xgC7qwggVU38Ksn48T3qL zHzsRTxfOdrvG/FF9kDo7q7ZYZHnvgIqCA1ANWmM5Z5KSeuOo9aMpCMn2waO1CS+KYqA XQLa52hDlUoU4b9PSKO4hKa0QWJ3Cm5ZJq/RY=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 19:56 +0000, Kamala Narasimhan wrote:
>> The format in which disk information is required in xl block-attach is 
>> different
>> than the one expected in the disk configuration option (in the config file). 
>>  It
>> might make sense to keep the two consistent (excluding the domain/backend 
>> dom id
>> additional param block-attach would require).  Would it be alright if I 
>> enforce
>> it in our implementation (in main_blockattach in xl_cmdimpl.c) and modify
>> block-attach help to reflect that change?
> 
> I think it makes sense to have them be the same (or as similar as
> possible).
> 
> OOI, do the xm block-attach and xm config syntaxes differ from each too?
> 

I think so.  The disk config syntax passed to xm through a config file is
different than xm block-attach syntax.

Kamala

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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.