From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: remove unused wrappers for python Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:14:30 +0200 Message-ID: <5613F366.1010006@suse.com> References: <1444128368-31585-1-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <20151006111849.GW29124@zion.uk.xensource.com> <5613B1A2.2030800@suse.com> <20151006113902.GY29124@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1444138837.5302.174.camel@citrix.com> <5613DFF9.6000309@suse.com> <1444144260.5302.212.camel@citrix.com> <5613E706.2060807@suse.com> <1444145211.5302.221.camel@citrix.com> <5613E918.4020509@oracle.com> <1444146359.5302.227.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: <1444146359.5302.227.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 , Zhigang Wang Cc: Andrew Cooper , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Wei Liu , ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/06/2015 05:45 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 11:30 -0400, Zhigang Wang wrote: >> On 10/06/2015 11:26 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 17:21 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> On 10/06/2015 05:11 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 16:51 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> On 10/06/2015 03:40 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 12:39 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And for the record, if my google-fu doesn't fail me, it's >>>>>>>> possible to >>>>>>>> load shared library into python interpreter using "dl" module >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> 2.7 >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> "ctypes" module in 3.x. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Possible, but not especially convenient since you need to >>>>>>> convert >>>>>>> the C >>>>>>> prototype manually, plus the result is not necessarily very >>>>>>> "pythonic". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I could totally see why people would prefer these bindings (or >>>>>>> an >>>>>>> argument >>>>>>> for us providing a ctypes based wrapper). >>>>>> >>>>>> How often is such a debugging interface being used? Please >>>>>> consider >>>>>> the amount of code (my patch removed nearly 3000 lines of code!) >>>>>> and >>>>>> the availability of the xl wrapper. >>>>> >>>>> My understanding was that this was used by the "xen-bugtool" stuff >>>>> in >>>>> XenServer, so for actual functionality (gathering debug info) and >>>>> not >>>>> debugging (I supposed that the reference to being used for >>>>> debugging was >>>>> due to the name of the tool). >>>> >>>> And this functionality isn't available via the xl bindings? >>> >>> I don't know, we'll have to wait for those who are using it to chime >>> in. >>> >>> Ian. >> >> IanC: I remember you said xl bindings has some design issue and should >> not be used. Is it still the case today? > > Yes. > > Sorry, I read Juergen's original "via the xl bindings" as "via libxl", i.e. > by using the library directly and forgot about the need for python bindings Uuh, too bad. So I should change my patch to remove the xl bindings? ;-) And what about xc bindings? What do I have to keep? Everything for xm and xend? Some bindings for your out-of-tree bugtool (can't this be converted to an in-tree tool written in C dumping out the information which is then post-processed with python) ? The original motivation was to get rid of the "superpages" option when building a pv-domU. If I have to keep xend compatibility I can't remove it. Juergen