From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [OPW PATCH V4] tools: xl: refactor code to parse network device options Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 08:56:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1414050974.20604.79.camel@citrix.com> References: <1413927381-21549-1-git-send-email-alecsandra.sandulescu@gmail.com> <1413977758.19198.12.camel@citrix.com> <20141022202146.GB6020@laptop.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XhDFp-0004rp-Rs for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:56:17 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20141022202146.GB6020@laptop.dumpdata.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, wei.liu2@citrix.com, Alexandra Sandulescu , konrad@darnok.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 16:21 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:35:58PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 00:36 +0300, Alexandra Sandulescu wrote: > > > This patch removes duplicate code in /tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c by > > > adding parse_nic_config function. This function parses configuration > > > data and adds the information into libxl_device_nic struct. It is > > > called in both main_networkattach and parse_config_data functions > > > to replace duplicate code. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandra Sandulescu > > > Acked-by: Wei Liu > > > > This looks good to me, thanks. In reply to the first posting I asked: > > Did you test both code paths? (wrt cfg file vs xl network-attach usage). > > Did you? > > > > Konrad, any reply to Wei's pros/cons on this patch for 4.5? > > (<20141021152420.GI10234@zion.uk.xensource.com>) > > Release-Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > I am making this based on the fact that: > - It has run through the OSSTest which does a ton of tests so the > chance of regression is almost nill. You mean "will", not "has", right? Since it won't be run through osstest until it is committed. Ian.