Re: [Xen-devel] Is: Discussion about doing it in Xen 4.5 or Xen 4.6 Was:Re: [PATCH] tools: remove blktap1

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 15:00 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 06:45:12PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 04/11/14 18:42, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 06:07:19PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > >> On 04/11/14 17:32, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:52:47AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > >>>> This was disabled by default in Xen 4.4. Since xend has now been 
> > >>>> removed from
> > >>>> the tree I don't believe anything is using it.
> > >>> What about XenServer?
> > >> We are most definitely not using it, and havenât used it in a very long
> > >> time. We explicitly nuke BLKTAP1 and BLKTAP2 from the Xen build.
> > >>
> > >>> And isn't there some blktap3 ?
> > >> https://github.com/xapi-project/blktap
> > >>
> > >>>> We need to pass an explicit CONFIG_BLKTAP1=n to qemu-xen-traditional 
> > >>>> otherwise
> > >>>> it defaults to y and doesn't build.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> I think this has probably missed the boat for 4.5 and there isn't much 
> > >>>> harm in
> > >>>> waiting for 4.6. I'm open to being told otherwise though ;-)
> > >>> You really want to be at the top of the commit list with the most 
> > >>> deleted
> > >>> code, eh?
> > >> /me suspects that he is already, but I for one am a fan of pruning dead
> > >> code.
> > > True, but we did talk about xend removal for quite a while before doing 
> > > it.
> > >
> > > However, I believe that the folks that did Remus look to be using it
> > > (And they have tons of patches against it).
> > >
> > >
> > >    It is unclear to me whether they:
> > >   - want to be the maintainers of it?
> > >   - want to use blktap3 but haven't yet backported their patches.
> > 
> > The remus patches are against blktap2, not blktap1.  We currently have
> > both in-tree.
> 
> <slaps his head>
> 
> OK, so blktap1 - dead. That looks like it could go under the knife now.

IMHO yes it could.

> blktap2 - waiting for response

This should stay, at least for the time being, and certainly for 4.5.

> Is the long-term idea to put 'blktap3' in the tree?

I don't think so.

George was going to make a proposal about future plans for blktap*.

Ian.


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