From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kamala Narasimhan <kamala.narasimhan@gmail.com>
Subject: xl block-attach
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 14:56:07 -0500
Message-ID: <4D45C257.3060702@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

The format in which disk information is required in xl block-attach is different
than the one expected in the disk configuration option (in the config file).  It
might make sense to keep the two consistent (excluding the domain/backend dom id
additional param block-attach would require).  Would it be alright if I enforce
it in our implementation (in main_blockattach in xl_cmdimpl.c) and modify
block-attach help to reflect that change?

Kamala