From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 6/7] xl: add usb-assignable-list command Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 13:49:25 +0200 Message-ID: <561506C5.6050205@suse.com> References: <1443147102-6471-1-git-send-email-cyliu@suse.com> <1443147102-6471-7-git-send-email-cyliu@suse.com> <5613FCE7.5080002@citrix.com> <1444207207.5302.269.camel@citrix.com> <1444216188.5302.333.camel@citrix.com> <5614FFF1.20304@citrix.com> <56150132.1040305@suse.com> <1444217988.1410.15.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1444217988.1410.15.camel@citrix.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 , George Dunlap , George Dunlap Cc: Ian Jackson , Jim Fehlig , Wei Liu , Chunyan Liu , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/07/2015 01:39 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:25 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> The "usb-assignable-list" that Chunyan has submitted will give you a >>> list of all dom0 USB devices that have not yet been assigned to a guest. >>> It should be basically equivalent to "lsusb", except that it filters >>> out devices which have already been assigned to VMs. > > Right, that does sound like useful enough functionality to justify not just > using lsusb. > >>> In the e-mail you respond to, I was suggesting that >>> >>> # xl usb-list --all >>> >>> would show you usb devices attached to every VM, and also USB devices >>> attached to no VM, and that > > And would "xl usb-list" list all domain attached to every VM but not the > unattached ones? > >>> # xl usb-list --host >>> >>> would show you only host usb devices not attached to any VM. >>> >>> I think it's the second bit if functionality which Juergen is keen be >>> available in some form or other. >> >> Exactly. > > I'm happy with this proposal too. > > Is the distinction between --host and --all important to you? Assuming > unassigned devices are clearly indicated in the --all output (as they > should be). Depends on how the output would look like. In case it either isn't containing VMs without any attached USB device or the unassigned devices are listed at the end this would be okay. I just wouldn't want to have to scroll a lot in case of a host with 1000 domains. BTW: In case you don't have the --host option it would be nice to omit --all as well and just assume --all when no domain was specified (like xl list). Juergen