From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73A89C433B4 for ; Tue, 4 May 2021 15:47:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F21F56101D for ; Tue, 4 May 2021 15:47:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F21F56101D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.122537.231113 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ldxGJ-0000bx-8K; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:47:03 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 122537.231113; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:47:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ldxGJ-0000bp-4N; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:47:03 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 122537; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:47:01 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ldxGH-0000ZL-Rm for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:47:01 +0000 Received: from esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.155.144]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 69d36ea5-fa61-4ef7-bed3-36c7949a9bf2; Tue, 04 May 2021 15:46:56 +0000 (UTC) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 69d36ea5-fa61-4ef7-bed3-36c7949a9bf2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1620143216; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=34vg3/jZvUrCWPff6Y7VRYmZB2dC0EvCkOqX+rXqM+k=; b=GrQ3WjIW3v+OVpbuK73wy+mkWI2SUrw+oXWGZX6wIxFIQkLZBcNb5Nhk ITQ4Fx4zaNKWxgNI5pvsPf+1d6IMDWUwF27EBckq0wDbxqAKW0BmlfIPU MsWarmV9VW5DPYFVX9ADrpIhiCylLDjGdQSMFO7fIKLuobKmf5WhkBsoD s=; Authentication-Results: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: 4y+ckJVHAPYofB4ReZke1LKLqakm3hKYjN7R5M3/QPb1OdMSh0uMBFTxcS2oaMNJo3t7a0U1F7 R7b+7c6a6Q5XiKEAhG8JEJ6r4KhthBcg9xV4lipLCzAA3WqdxZcn9wWwgLOyDDrXgQeePzsIdA hhitXHqZHBQkUxBHzA/VNgOTfsUhWcskFyMFM/6Av7rD47DqdldkmMzQG8wh/AwzCvoIjned2P iFI4jnduAdzK6MmV5PA9Ij+Z5a5Tel5S2N6VRaPsTwNTiuhcZrFE14oRHYaeeI3FT3EsRmj+MB /Es= X-SBRS: 5.1 X-MesageID: 44559840 X-Ironport-Server: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:qC5JJa171fIOgaHmDVxmswqjBJskLtp033Aq2lEZdDV+dMuEm8 ey2MkKzBOcslcscVwphNzoAsK9aFzG85od2+MsFJODeCWjh2eyNoFl6uLZrQHIPyHl7OZS2e NBXsFFZOHYNlRxgcbk7ATQKb9J/PC87Kuqie3Cpk0DcShWbchbgjtENg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,272,1613451600"; d="scan'208";a="44559840" Date: Tue, 4 May 2021 16:46:52 +0100 From: Anthony PERARD To: Nick Rosbrook CC: , , "Nick Rosbrook" , Ian Jackson , Wei Liu Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/7] add function support to IDL Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 08:46:12PM -0500, Nick Rosbrook wrote: > At a Xen Summit design session for the golang bindings (see [1]), we > agreed that it would be beneficial to expand the libxl IDL with function > support. In addition to benefiting libxl itself, this would allow other > language bindings to easily generate function wrappers. > > The first version of this RFC is quite old [1]. I did address comments > on the original RFC, but also expanded the scope a bit. As a way to > evaluate function support, I worked on using this addition to the IDL to > generate device add/remove/destroy functions, and removing the > corresponding macros in libxl_internal.h. However, I stopped short of > actually completing a build with this in place, as I thought it made > sense to get feedback on the idea before working on the next step. The series looks good to me, beside a few detail. Cheers, -- Anthony PERARD