Re: latest USB code including Xenidc documentation

[Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>]

Harry Butterworth wrote:

>I'm happy to do that for the USB driver if that's what people decide
>they want but I'm reluctant to do it without people having first
>considered the idea of having a higher level interdomain communication
>API and thought about xenidc as a possible option.
>  
>
I think Muli's point (which I agree with) is that the question of a 
higher level interdomain communication API is orthagonal to the USB 
driver and that submitting the two at once makes it difficult to review 
because of sheer size.

In fact, what I would really like to see is a before and after with the 
USB driver (one version that uses the current mechanism and uses 
xenidc).  This would be a good way to evaluate how much complexity 
xenidc introduces/removes from the drivers.  xenidc is a big decision 
because it means yet another rewrite of all the device drivers (we've 
gone through how many in the past year already :-)).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>  
>
>>Cheers,
>>Muli
>>    
>>