From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kamala Narasimhan <kamala.narasimhan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: xl block-attach
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:10:33 -0500
Message-ID: <4D46D0E9.8030605@gmail.com>
References: <4D45C257.3060702@gmail.com>
	<1296485964.4037.65.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <1296485964.4037.65.camel@zakaz.uk.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: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 19:56 +0000, Kamala Narasimhan wrote:
>> 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?
> 
> I think it makes sense to have them be the same (or as similar as
> possible).
> 
> OOI, do the xm block-attach and xm config syntaxes differ from each too?
> 

I think so.  The disk config syntax passed to xm through a config file is
different than xm block-attach syntax.

Kamala