xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
	PaulDurrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
	Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@citrix.com>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 10:36:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160218103628.GC3723@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56C5ABA502000078000D3982@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 03:31:49AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.02.16 at 18:28, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
> > Hi all
> > 
> > Tools people are in the process of splitting libxenctrl into a set of
> > stable libraries. One of the proposed libraries is libxendevicemodel
> > which has a collection of APIs that can be used by device model.
> > 
> > Currently we use QEMU as reference to extract symbols and go through
> > them one by one. Along the way we discover QEMU is using some tools
> > only HVMOPs.
> > 
> > The list of tools only HVMOPs used by QEMU are:
> > 
> >   #define HVMOP_track_dirty_vram    6
> >   #define HVMOP_modified_memory    7
> >   #define HVMOP_set_mem_type    8
> >   #define HVMOP_inject_msi         16
> >   #define HVMOP_create_ioreq_server 17
> >   #define HVMOP_get_ioreq_server_info 18
> >   #define HVMOP_map_io_range_to_ioreq_server 19
> >   #define HVMOP_unmap_io_range_from_ioreq_server 20
> >   #define HVMOP_destroy_ioreq_server 21
> >   #define HVMOP_set_ioreq_server_state 22
> 
> I've just grep-ed both qemu trees, and neither appears to directly
> use any of these constants. So as long as qemu's use is solely
> through libxc interfaces, I don't see an immediate issue.
> 
> > I'm curious about the rationale for making them tools only in the
> > first place and what needs to be done to make them stable.
> 
> Qemu, in the original consideration, may also have been deemed
> part of the tools.
> 
> > The option to build stable library APIs on top of unstable hypervisor
> > APIs is always there, but that looks suboptimal to me.
> 
> Well, as long as we continue to tie libxc to the hypervisor version,
> I think hiding versioning issues there would be fine.
> 

I think you missed the first part of my email -- we are trying to split
part of libxc out to make it stable.  Ian's reply in a sibling thread
has made clear the rationale behind this.  

Libxc is still tied to hypervisor, but the libraries that we split out
are stable.

Wei.

> Jan
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-18 10:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-17 17:28 Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs? Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:24 ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:37   ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:45     ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:53       ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:55         ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:56       ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:31 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:36   ` Wei Liu [this message]
2016-02-18 10:44   ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:55     ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:59       ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 11:04         ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 12:51 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:28   ` Ian Jackson
2016-02-18 16:29     ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:41     ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 16:45       ` Ian Jackson
2016-02-18 16:49       ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:37   ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-19 16:05 ` Domctl and physdevop for passthrough (Was: Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?) Wei Liu
2016-02-22 11:28   ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-22 11:56     ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 14:31     ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 15:46       ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:09         ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 17:24           ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:28             ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:55             ` Wei Liu
2016-02-29 12:23       ` Wei Liu
2016-02-29 12:29         ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-29 18:12           ` Wei Liu
2016-03-01  7:54             ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-01 10:52               ` Wei Liu
2016-03-01 11:10                 ` Jan Beulich

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160218103628.GC3723@citrix.com \
    --to=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=Paul.Durrant@citrix.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=anthony.perard@citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
    --cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).