Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 COLOPre 15/26] tools/libxl: Add back channel to allow migration target send data back

[Yang Hongyang <yanghy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/01/2015 06:40 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-07-01 at 10:28 +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote:
> > On 06/30/2015 06:07 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 14:25 +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote:
> > > > + * LIBXL_HAVE_DOMAIN_CREATE_RESTORE_SEND_FD 1
> > > > + *
> > > > + * If this is defined, libxl_domain_create_restore()'s API has changed to
> > > > + * include a send_fd param which used for libxl migration back channel.
> > >                                      ^is
> > >
> > > Perhaps also end the sentence with "during $foo operations"? Since it is
> > > not used for standard restore.
> > IIRC, at hackthon, someone from alibaba also mentioned that they need a back
> > channel on normal migration
> There is no code like that in tree, if such is added then comments may
> need to be adjusted.
>
> > ...For the standard restore, just pass -1 as
> > send_fd.
> Correct.
>
> I'm asking for a clarification to thew comment here, not a code change.
Sure and thanks!

> > > >    int libxl_domain_create_restore(libxl_ctx *ctx, libxl_domain_config 
> > > > *d_config,
> > > > -                                uint32_t *domid, int restore_fd,
> > > > +                                uint32_t *domid, int restore_fd, int send_fd,
> > > This is probably not a good idea, but what about "int fd[2]", i.e.
> > > mimicking pipe(2). I suspect this will just make things harder on
> > I suspect so...
> >
> > > callers, especially those who wish to work with both versions. Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Ian.
> > >
> > > .
>
> .
--
Thanks,
Yang.

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