From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Stodden Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Xen blkback for 2.6.40. Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:37:04 -0700 Message-ID: <1303151824.9965.72.camel@agari.van.xensource.com> References: <1303149464-875-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1303149464-875-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 13:57 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > I am proposing this patch for 2.6.40. This is an RFC at this point. > > The git tree for this specific patch is > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git devel/xen-blkback-v3.squashed > > (the full tree is devel/xen-blkback-v3) > > Please take a look at the patch. I know that I need to rewrite the description > to have more details for the upstream community - and that will be shortly supplied. > > Any thoughts on what I should address/remove/augment/etc would be appreciated. And whether > the code has any obvious pitfalls? > > The code was originally lifted from 2.6.18, then ported to 2.6.32, and now I have backported > it to 2.6.38/.39. scripts/checkpatch.pl had been applied and also some re-ordering of the code > has been done to make it easier to read. If propose to consider eliminating vbd.c and interface.c, inlining the critical bits where they belong, respectively. Leaving only blkback.c for the data- and xenbus.c for the control path. I don't think there's anything notable in there which has more than a single position to call it from. It always looked like out of some abstraction layer to me, maybe with blktap1 in mind. Beyond that, I don't see that getting anywhere. Daniel