Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wei Liu [mailto:wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 18 April 2016 10:15
> To: George Dunlap
> Cc: Paul Durrant; Jan Beulich; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Kevin Tian; Keir
> (Xen.org); Andrew Cooper; Tim (Xen.org); Yu Zhang; zhiyuan.lv@xxxxxxxxx;
> Jun Nakajima; Wei Liu
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
> p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:10:00AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> > >> Sent: 08 April 2016 22:48
> > >> To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> Cc: Andrew Cooper; Paul Durrant; George Dunlap; Jun Nakajima; Kevin
> Tian;
> > >> zhiyuan.lv@xxxxxxxxx; Yu Zhang; Keir (Xen.org); Tim (Xen.org)
> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
> p2m_mmio_write_dm
> > >> to p2m_ioreq_server
> > >>
> > >> >>> On 31.03.16 at 12:53, <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > --- a/xen/include/public/hvm/hvm_op.h
> > >> > +++ b/xen/include/public/hvm/hvm_op.h
> > >> > @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ typedef enum {
> > >> >      HVMMEM_ram_rw,             /* Normal read/write guest RAM */
> > >> >      HVMMEM_ram_ro,             /* Read-only; writes are discarded */
> > >> >      HVMMEM_mmio_dm,            /* Reads and write go to the device
> model
> > >> */
> > >> > -    HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm       /* Read-only; writes go to the
> device
> > >> model */
> > >> > +    HVMMEM_ioreq_server,
> > >> >  } hvmmem_type_t;
> > >> >
> > >> >  /* Following tools-only interfaces may change in future. */
> > >>
> > >> So there's one problem here, which the comment at the bottom
> > >> of the context already hints at: This enum is part of the not
> > >> tools restricted interface (as HVMOP_get_mem_type is usable
> > >> by guests themselves), which we cannot change like this. Since
> > >> the meaning of the enumerator value doesn't change, I guess
> > >> we can get away with simply retaining its old name for non-up-
> > >> to-date __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Has the type made it into a release yet. I was assuming we could make
> the change without any need to play with the version since it's only ever
> been present in  xen-unstable so far.
> >
> > I think you need a Release Manager ack for that; but if it's the case
> > that the type has never been seen in public, then I think it should be
> > able to be renamed (in fact, we should rename it so that we don't have
> > to deal with backwards compatibility later).
> >
> 
> If it is not released yet, feel free to change it -- but at this point
> you also need to present argument on why it should be changed. I don't
> expect the seddery too hard to review.
> 

There was a design doc posted to the list a couple of months back which has the 
justification. See 
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-02/msg03770.html

  Paul

> Wei.
> 
> >  -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel