From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 6/7] xl: add usb-assignable-list command Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:21:02 +0100 Message-ID: <56151C3E.4000504@citrix.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> <561506C5.6050205@suse.com> <1444218902.1410.25.camel@citrix.com> <56150A6C.2080101@suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <56150A6C.2080101@suse.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: Juergen Gross , Ian Campbell , George Dunlap Cc: Ian Jackson , Jim Fehlig , Wei Liu , Chunyan Liu , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/10/15 13:05, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 10/07/2015 01:55 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:49 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> 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. >> >> Makes sense. >> >>> 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). >> >> I think "xl usb-list" should list the devices attached to all domains, >> for >> sure. I'm ambivalent about whether it also lists unattached devices (in >> which case --all is unnecessary) or if --all is required to get those. > > I'd go for nuking the --all option. I suppose xl usb-list without > specifying a domain will nearly always be used to see the unassigned > devices and not "uuh, to which domain did I assign device x?". I don't know -- if you've assigned a device to one particular domain, then it seems pretty likely that at some point in the future you might want to say, "Wait, what devices do I have assigned where again?" I think * people will expect "xl usb-list" to show all VMs but *not* all unassigned host devices * In this sort of a case, doing what people expect is probably more important than doing what we think is probably more convenient for them. I'd go for "--all" and "--host", but I think it's not terribly important. Chunyan, do you have any input / opinions? -George