From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] libxl: postpone backend name resolution Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:23:48 +0100 Message-ID: <516D34C4.70703@eu.citrix.com> References: <1365780146-20785-1-git-send-email-dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov> <1366027867.4963.120.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1366027867.4963.120.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.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: Ian Campbell Cc: Daniel De Graaf , Stefano Stabellini , Ian Jackson , Roger Pau Monne , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 15/04/13 13:11, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 16:22 +0100, Daniel De Graaf wrote: >> This adds a backend_domname field in libxl devices that contain a >> backend_domid field, allowing either a domid or a domain name to be >> specified in the configuration structures. The domain name is resolved >> into a domain ID in the _setdefault function when adding the device. >> This change allows the backend of the block devices to be specified >> (which previously required passing the libxl_ctx down into the block >> device parser), and will simplify specification of backend domains in >> other users of libxl. > Looks good to me (some minor comments below). Given that the initial > version of this was posted ages ago I think this should be granted a > freeze exception. George? 1. It seems like if there are any bugs they should be caught before the release 2. Allowing disk backends to be specified seems like a very good feature for 4.3; and it seems like if there is a bug it should be caught before the release and fairly easy to fix. So re the code freeze: Acked-by: George Dunlap