From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxc: remove most of tools/libxc/xc_dom_compat_linux.c Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:15:41 +0200 Message-ID: <5629DE9D.8000404@suse.com> References: <1444131327-22000-1-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <5613C400.4040209@citrix.com> <20151006125858.GB29124@zion.uk.xensource.com> <5613C773.5030901@citrix.com> <1444137461.5302.167.camel@citrix.com> <5624C7C3.2030007@suse.com> <22056.65314.301337.452773@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <1445528287.2374.15.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: <1445528287.2374.15.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 , Ian Jackson Cc: Andrew Cooper , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Wei Liu , stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/22/2015 05:38 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 16:22 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: >> Juergen Gross writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxc: remove most of >> tools/libxc/xc_dom_compat_linux.c"): >>> On 10/06/2015 03:17 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>> xc_dom_linux_build is implemented in terms of the non-compat xc_dom_* >>>> functions, so it should be possible to do what you want with out >>>> using the >>>> compat wrapper. >>>> >>>> If there is some obscure reason this isn't the case then we should >>>> fix >>>> that, not carry around the compat options for ever as a workaround >>>> (fixes >>>> include but are not limited to promoting xc_dom_linux_build into a >>>> non >>>> -compat helper). >> >> I agree with this approach. >> >>> Any further comments? >>> >>> Andrew, are you okay with Ian's statement? >>> >>> Ian, does this mean you are Ack-ing the patch? >> >> Accordingly, in the absence of renewed objections, or alternative >> proposals, the original patch is: >> >> Acked-by: Ian Jackson > > There was a conflict with "libxc: unify xc_dom_p2m_{host/guest}", where > xc_dom_p2m_host became xc_dom_p2m. I tried to resolve in what I thought was > the obvious way, but then I got many instances of: > > In file included from libxl.c:19:0: > libxl_internal.h:1612:43: error: 'struct xc_dom_image' declared inside parameter list [-Werror] > struct xc_dom_image *dom); > ^ > libxl_internal.h:1612:43: error: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want [-Werror] > > Not sure if the original patch was wrong, has bit-rotted, or I messed up > the conflict resolution. This happens on all arches. > > Actually, looking back at it, the added "struct xc_dom_image" in > libxl_arch.h is surely wrong, the right answer would be to include xc_dom.h > somewhere appropriate it might be tolerable to just leave it in xenguest.h. > > Juergen, please investigate the build failure, fix the above and resubmit. That was easy. Just removing the definition for libxl_arch.h, include xc_dom.h from libxl_internal.h and modify xc_dom.h to tolerate including it multiple times. I've stumbled over another issue: I don't know what I did wrong, but obviously the patch was built on top of the libxc python wrappers removal patch. Without that there are still some functions in use which I wanted to remove in xc_dom_compat_linux.c As there was no objection for the intention of removing most of the wrappers I'll resend the xc_dom_compat_linux.c cleanup patch together with the libxc python wrappers cleanup in a series. Juergen