Re: [PATCH 0/6] Use system blktap

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

On 07/07/2015 03:52 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 15:24 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 07/07/2015 03:21 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 11:51 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>>> George Dunlap (6): 
>>>>   libxl: Make local_initiate_attach more rational
>>>>   libxl: Remove linux udev rules
>>>>   tools: Add a block-tap script for setting up tapdisks via tap-ctl
>>>>   libxl: Use the block-tap script for LIBXL_DISK_BACKEND_TAP
>>>>   tools: Remove in-tree blktap2
>>>>   libxl: Add more logging to hotplug script path
>>>
>>> Could some subset of this series safely go in now? I'm thinking in
>>> particular of:
>>>   libxl: Make local_initiate_attach more rational
>>>   libxl: Add more logging to hotplug script path
>>>
>>> Which look useful and standalone, assuming the first doesn't need any of
>>> the rest.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if the udev stuff makes sense without the blktap script
>>> stuff (which appears to need a little more discussion if nothing else).
>>> I'll take it if you say it is safe to do so...
>>
>> The first three can go in without any regressions,
> 
> ITYM the first two and sixth? i.e.
> 
> b1882a4 libxl: Make local_initiate_attach more rational
> 2ba368d libxl: Remove linux udev rules
> eff228d libxl: Add more logging to hotplug script path
> 
> So that is what I'm in the middle of applying...

Well actually I meant the first three. :-)

To quote myself from the cover letter:

"The third patch (tools: Add a block-tap script for setting up tapdisks
via tap-ctl) can also be checked in independently from the fourth and
fifth, as it allows someone to disable blktap support in configure but
still use externally-built tap-ctl binaries (albeit with a different
disk string)."

 -George