Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH LIBVIRT v1 1/2] libxl: Correct value for xendConfigVersion to xen{Parse, Format}ConfigCommon

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 10:01 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:13:06PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> > On 11/26/2015 09:59 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > libxlConnectDomainXMLFromNative calls both xenParseXM and xenParseXL
> > > with cfg->verInfo->xen_version_major, however AFAICT they both
> > > (either
> > > inherently, or through there use of xenParseConfigCommon expect a
> > > value from xenConfigVersionEnum (which does not correspond to
> > > xen_version_major).
> > 
> > I recall being a little apprehensive about using xen_version_major when
> > writing
> > the code, and apparently that was justified. But now that we are
> > revisiting
> > this, I wonder if we care about these old xend config versions at all.
> > Is anyone
> > even running Xen 3.0.x, or 3.1.x, particularly with a newish libvirt?
> > IMO we
> > could drop all of this xend config nonsense and go with the code
> > associated with
> > the last xend config version, i.e. XEND_CONFIG_VERSION_3_1_0.
> > 
> > And while mentioning dropping support for these old xend config
> > versions, do I
> > dare mention dropping the xend driver altogether? :-) It will certainly
> > need to
> > be done some day. Question is whether that's a bit premature now.
> 
> We just decided to drop QEMU driver code supporting for RHEL-5 vintage
> distros, requiring RHEL-6 as minimum. So I think it is entirely reasonable
> to drop Xen driver code supporting similar vintage XenD.ÂÂThat would
> certainly simplify or even eliminate the current crazy xend_config_version
> code we have

RHEL 6.0 looks[0] to have been release on 2010-11-09, which was in the
middle of Xen 4.0 and 4.1[1]. 4.0 seems like a decent enough cut off point
(and is what is in Debian oldstable AKA Wheezy, FWIW) plus it is after the
currently latestÂXEND_CONFIG_VERSION, so all that code could be removed.

Shall I respin this series with that as a precursor?

Ian.

[0]Âhttps://access.redhat.com/articles/3078
[1]Âhttp://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Release_Features

> I think we need to continue suppoorting XenD driver for a while, but at
> least you can simplify the code shared with libxl.
> 
> Regards,
> Daniel

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