Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough

[Ross Philipson <Ross.Philipson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:47 AM
> To: Ross Philipson
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk; Konrad Rzeszutek Will; xen-
> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough
> 
> Ross Philipson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware
> passthrough"):
> > I am not sure if that is related to my patches. I had brought up the
> point
> > that the new xc_hvm_build() routine was never called from xl. I think
> the
> > consensus was that I should remedy that in the process of adding the
> support
> > for fw pass-through.
> 
> I think in general it is best to introduce new features in the whole
> stack in the same series.
> 
> That way we don't introduce code at lower layers only to discover
> later that the higher layer wants something different.

In the future I will do this.

> 
> > I planned to do xl after the first patch set went in - are there any
> vetoes
> > to that plan? Also since I will be adding parameters I suspect I need
> to
> > update the docs on the xl configuration files. Any pointers on how to
> do that
> > would be helpful. I see the man page source in docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5;
> is
> > the wiki information generated off of this?
> 
> How are you testing this series yourself if you don't have a suitable
> series for libxl/xl as well ?

I just had some hard coded test code that more or less behaved as the
code I am submitting for libxl behaves.

> 
> Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel