[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v15] This is the ABI for the two halves of a para-virtualized sound driver to communicate with each to other.
- To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 13:13:46 -0500
- Cc: lars.kurth@xxxxxxxxxx, iurii.konovalenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, vlad.babchuk@xxxxxxxxx, ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx, tim@xxxxxxx, julien.grall@xxxxxxx, andrii.anisov@xxxxxxxxx, olekstysh@xxxxxxxxx, embedded-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, al1img@xxxxxxxxx, david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx, JBeulich@xxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, oleksandr.dmytryshyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, joculator@xxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:14:07 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
.snip..
> I am looking at this from FAE's or integrator's POV, when one would need
FAE?
> to touch different parts of the system. "/0/0/0" makes me feel
> sad just because either you have to keep all those numbers in mind (like you
> do)
> or have documentation available (and know where it is, e.g. sources
> of Xen or kernel).
> I have a strong feeling that if you can change configuration without
> knowing what index stands for it is always better and fail-safer then
> just having numbers...
Not sure I follow that.
How would you change configuration without knowing the index?
..snip..
> ok, then
>
> struct xensnd_rw_req {
> uint32_t offset;
> uint32_t len;
> };
> covers all the requests, but open/close
> Do you want me to keep the same structure name (xensnd_rw_req)
> or rename it to something like xensnd_io_req?
The name is fine.
>
> Thank you,
> Oleksandr
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
