From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/19] TestSupport: always use xl for
 generic operations.
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 14:34:31 +0000
Message-ID: <1423060471.24924.6.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1422282868.6342.13.camel@citrix.com>
	<1422282935-24292-7-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com>
	<21703.49006.596653.495026@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<1422378568.16180.14.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1422378568.16180.14.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 17:09 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 16:40 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Ian Campbell writes ("[PATCH v3 07/19] TestSupport: always use xl for generic operations."):
> > > Unless the toolstack is xend (for compatibility with pre-xl Xen
> > > versions), when we use xm.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > > For several operations in TestSupport.pm the actual toolstack isn't
> > > really relevant, since we want info straight from Xen. For simplicity
> > > just use xl (or xm) in these cases, to avoid needing to implement the
> > > following specially for each toolstack:
> > >   - host_get_free_memory
> > >   - guest_get_state
> > >   - guest_find_domid
> > >   - listing assignable pci devices
> > 
> > I think at the very least "guest_get_state" should be implemented
> > per-toolstack to exercise the toolstack's query functionality.  But
> > that's not a blocker for this series.
> 
> True. I'll see if I can make that happen for v4.

... I didn't.

I've just looked now and I don't see a way to extract the necessary
granularity info via virsh needed to replicate the interface which the
callers expect. I can just get running or not.

Possibly with some refactoring the callers could be made to ask
questions which virsh can answer, but I don't propose to work on that
right now.

Ian.