Re: [Xen-devel] Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Beulich writes ("Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?"):
> On 18.02.16 at 17:28, <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Wei Liu writes ("Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?"):
> >> I think we come to the conclusion that these HVMOPs should be made
> >> stable. And to do so I'm going to introduce a __XEN_TOOLS_STABLE__ macro
> >> for them to distinguish from __XEN_TOOLS__.  And then libxendevicemodel
> >> will have -D__XEN_TOOLS_STABLE__  only.
> >> 
> >> Does this sound sufficient?
> > 
> > It would be better to rename -D__XEN_TOOLS__ too, to
> > -D__XEN_TOOLS_UNSTABLE.
> 
> Even if a minor one, this will create a compatibility problem for
> out of tree code including the headers: Their builds will all of
> the sudden break, until they figure they need to go and
> #define this new manifest symbol. Otoh maybe we would
> actually like to break their builds this way, to make them aware
> of the fact.

We're talking here mostly about the unstable API, right ?  Well this
is a kind of instability :-).

> In which case maybe __XEN_TOOLS__ should be
> retained for the stable portions?

In principle that might be nice but actually the library split means
they have to change anyway.

Ian.

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