Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 11/14] libxl: get and set soft affinity

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 19:58 +0100, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> As per the mechanism used to amend the current API, I don't have a real
> preference. Both me and George asked (in a previous thread) what
> mechanism we should use, but we did not get much feedback at that time
> (not complain, just summing up what has happened).

Yes, sorry about that.

> Right now, I think I just need for someone authoritative enough to
> express his preference. You certainly qualify as such, but, if possible,
> I'd like to see what the other Ian thinks too, as he's been quite deeply
> involved in reviewing this interface.

I think the major argument in favour of the LIBXL_API_VERSION based
approach is that this is how we have dealt with all the previous such
changes. Having a mixture of this and fooN interfaces seems to me to be
worse that either option by itself.

> > > the '3' variant (tries to) accomplish what IanJ explicitly asked: having
> > > a way to set both hard and soft affinity at the same time, and each with
> > > its own value, and only checking for consistency at the very end.
> > 
> > Can this not be accomplished by a single function which accepts one or
> > zero of the bitmasks being NULL?
> >
> I'll see whether that's true, but yes, I think I can do that.

Thanks,
Ian.



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