Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 4/6] libxl: Add "stubdomain_version" to domain_build_info.

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 14:31 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On 19/04/13 10:29, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-04-17 at 20:09 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> >> This enum give the ability to select between the MiniOS based stubdomain
> >> and the Linux based stubdomain. It can be written in a VM config file via
> >> "stubdomain_version" variable, but will be automatically filled by the
> >> appropriate value depending on the device_model_version. To use the
> >> stubdomain, it's the same config option
> >> "devive_model_stubdomain_override=1" to force the stubdomain.
> > 
> > Given that there is no actual choice available (it's minios for
> > qemu-xen-trad and Linux for qemu-xen) at the moment perhaps we should
> > just leave this option out for now and cross this bridge if/when there
> > is a real choice to be made?
> 
> I feel like this will be an easier thing to do for now.
> 
> > If we do want to keep this then I think I'd prefer to see us extend the
> > semantics of device_model_stubdomain_override to be more than a simple
> > boolean, e.g. make it a libxl enum libxl_device_model_stubdomain_type:
> >     0 = "none" => process dm in dom0
> >     1 = "minios" => mini-os based stubdom
> >     2 = "linux" => ...
> >     3 = "foobsd" => ...
> 
> With this, I don't see how to say: "I want a stubdom for this domain."

-1 = "default" ;-)

> without having to know which type will be the best (or only) choice. So
> I go for the no choice for the user, beside stubdom or not.
> 



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