From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 --for 4.6 COLOPre 21/25] tools/libxl: rename remus device to checkpoint device Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:31:56 +0100 Message-ID: <1437039116.32371.144.camel@citrix.com> References: <1436946351-21118-1-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> <1436946351-21118-22-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> <1436967160.32371.67.camel@citrix.com> <55A777FA.6070006@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55A777FA.6070006@cn.fujitsu.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: Yang Hongyang Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, yunhong.jiang@intel.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, rshriram@cs.ubc.ca, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 17:23 +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote: > > On 07/15/2015 09:32 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 15:45 +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote: > >> tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl | 4 +- > > > >> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl > >> index e8d3647..1d676ef 100644 > >> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl > >> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl > >> @@ -61,8 +61,8 @@ libxl_error = Enumeration("error", [ > >> (-15, "LOCK_FAIL"), > >> (-16, "JSON_CONFIG_EMPTY"), > >> (-17, "DEVICE_EXISTS"), > >> - (-18, "REMUS_DEVOPS_DOES_NOT_MATCH"), > >> - (-19, "REMUS_DEVICE_NOT_SUPPORTED"), > >> + (-18, "CHECKPOINT_DEVOPS_DOES_NOT_MATCH"), > >> + (-19, "CHECKPOINT_DEVICE_NOT_SUPPORTED"), > >> (-20, "VNUMA_CONFIG_INVALID"), > >> (-21, "DOMAIN_NOTFOUND"), > >> (-22, "ABORTED"), > > > > This is an API change, which I think we discussed before. > > > > In <558BC6EE.60801@cn.fujitsu.com> you said you would add an extra patch > > to deal with that, and I think that needs to come before this automatic > > renaming so that there is no bisect hazard. > > Seems either before or after will break the bisection...Only merge in one > patch will makes sense... If you break out this specific renaming into a precursor patch then you can add the compat stuff in at that time. Please don't combine all that into this one patch. > I don't see any such patch > > even after this point though (from grepping your colo-v8 branch). > > > > Ian. > > > > . > > >