From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 00/12] xen: Clean-up of mem_event
	subsystem
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:31:51 +0100
Message-ID: <1429011111.15516.37.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1427404024-30567-1-git-send-email-tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
	<20150409110318.GB17025@deinos.phlegethon.org>
	<CABfawh=MC7AHnegR8LJC2F8t8SDv+EpK6Baki2DSU15Te3W-UA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABfawhnvyPCC-Q0JK86nytN2--L_FQoXRgKG2XqyzaPO0_YivQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150409113020.GC17025@deinos.phlegethon.org>
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: <20150409113020.GC17025@deinos.phlegethon.org>
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: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>, Steven Maresca <steve@zentific.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Tamas Lengyel <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@intel.com>, Andres Lagar Cavilla <andres@lagarcavilla.org>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, "rshriram@cs.ubc.ca" <rshriram@cs.ubc.ca>, "wei.liu2@citrix.com" <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>, "yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com" <yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>, Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 12:30 +0100, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > What's the policy on reusing DOMCTL numbers? I see
> > XEN_DOMCTL_arm_configure_domain
> > has been retired in the conflicting patch. Should I just reuse it's number
> > for monitor_op? For the most part domctl numbers seem to be continuous but
> > there are holes (30-32) so I'm not sure.
> 
> I'm not sure either.  I'd be inlclined to leave a hole here, to avoid
> any accidental confusion with the recently-removed op, but other
> maintainers may disagree. :)

I also think we should leave a hole. And perhaps we should have left a
"previous used as" type comment when removing arm_configure_domain,
sorry for not thinking of that at the time...

Ian.