From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: /proc/xen/xenbus supports watch? Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:54:48 +1000 Message-ID: <1127429689.2722.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <5d7aca9505090801025f3d5771@mail.gmail.com> <3d8eece205090803381b818f18@mail.gmail.com> <1126226609.25110.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3d8eece205091302422ac74f77@mail.gmail.com> <1126657264.7896.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1126689530.4415.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3d8eece205091405555a2871fc@mail.gmail.com> <1126748390.12119.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1126945564.29203.116.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1127088661.23870.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1127214064.2656.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <152436486e4a36af94a87ad6d40a768e@cl.cam.ac.uk> <1127354853.7567.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel List , Christian Limpach List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 10:36 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: > On 22 Sep 2005, at 03:07, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > Exactly! So you would have me implement multiplexing code in the > > kernel, demultiplexing code in the daemon, checking code in the kernel > > to make sure we don't corrupt the shared comms channel, for no reason. > > Better to implement simple mux/demux code than pain-in-the-arse > save/restore code. But but but... it doesn't *help*. That's the entire point! OK, please describe, in simple terms, why you think save/restore is different if we multiplex across a single transport? Rusty. -- A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman