Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/5] Add hypervisor sysfs-like support

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 11.09.2019 15:01, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 11.09.19 13:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 11.09.2019 13:29, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> On 11.09.19 13:17, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> Second, is xenfs really the best name here?  It is ambiguous with the
>>>> still-essential (even though it really needs to disappear) Linux
>>>> filesystem by the name xenfs.
>>>
>>> Yes, I'm aware of that ambiguity. I'm absolutely in favor of finding a
>>> better name.
>>>
>>> Maybe xensysfs?
>>
>> Or just xensys (albeit that's likely getting ambiguous)? I'm
>> not fully convinced calling this a file system is a good idea.
>> Windows' name-value pair store is called registry, for
>> example, despite it also resembling a file system to a certain
>> degree.
> 
> "Registry" doesn't seem correct regarding the potential dynamically
> generated entries.

I also didn't mean to suggest "registry" as a name. The Windows
registry does, however (and despite its name), contain dynamic
data afaik (certain performance counters for example).

> And with the idea to "mount" it in the dom0 kernel's sysfs I think
> xensysfs (or xenhypfs?) seems appropriate.

Well, such "mounting" is going to be indirect, I would assume?
I.e. not directly forward filesystem like requests as such to
Xen?

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel