From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Subject: Re: libxl_device handling for nic and vtmp
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:19:07 +0100
Message-ID: <20160218171907.GA9285@aepfle.de>
References: <20160218151321.GA10541@aepfle.de>
	<20160218155219.GA7186@citrix.com>
	<20160218165438.GA1394@aepfle.de>
	<20160218170235.GB24938@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>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160218170235.GB24938@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: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, Feb 18, Wei Liu wrote:

> Sorry I don't follow. What do you mean by 1:1 copy? Why does it make the
> update unnecessary?

The current code does:

  libxl_device_nic_init(&nic_saved);
  libxl_device_nic_copy(CTX, &nic_saved, nic);
  nic->devid = libxl__device_nextid(gc, domid, "vif");
  libxl__update_config_nic(gc, &nic_saved, nic);

Which is equivalent to the more obvious version:

  libxl_device_nic_init(&nic_saved);
  nic->devid = libxl__device_nextid(gc, domid, "vif");
  libxl_device_nic_copy(CTX, &nic_saved, nic);

The input gets modified either way. Is it expected that future versions
of libxl_device_nic/vtmp_copy will not duplicate the mac/uuid parts?


Olaf