[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 2/7] remus: introduce remus device
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Most of the if(netbuf_enabled) {} else {} is an artifact of whether or not the host system has the correct version of libnl installed. If autoconf said no, then libxl_nonetbuffer.c would be compiled in, but
the existence (or not) of network buffers had to be checked at various points in code (in libxl), especially for teardown path. It seems harder to imagine a case where not replicating a disk would be Read only root file system, tmpfs based scratch file system? Its useful to just use memory replication for testing/profiling purposes. So i think a better alternative would be to have an explicit test flag (-t) followed by the no-netbuf flag (-n) and/or the no disk buffering flag (-d). ÂUse of a test flag should be suggestive enough to the innocent user that this invocation is notÂ
meant for production, while flexible enough for someone with knowledge of the system to disable network or disk replication for other needs. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |