Re: regression with c/s 21223

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>]

On 07/05/2010 20:31, "Jim Fehlig" <jfehlig@novell.com> wrote:

>>  I suppose it really just punts
>> the tap2 issues, unless we also get rid of the tap2-falls-back-to-tap1
>> logic?
>>   
> 
> It reverts 2 hunks of c/s 19874, which implicitly converts the device to
> tap2 in a xend client app!  If the same configuration is provided to
> xend through libvirt, this implicit conversion does not occur.  I'd
> suspect this is true for direct users of XenAPI as well.
> 
> But yes, I agree that if an explicit differentiation between tap and
> tap2 exists, then the tap2-fall-back-to-tap1 logic should be removed.
> It would be nice to get input from others, particularly authors of
> blktap2 integration patches :-).

Well, in the absence of that I'm happy to take the patch, and I guess
backport it for 4.0.1.

 -- Keir