[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md: clarify that deletes are recursive


  • To: "jgross@xxxxxxxx" <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Edwin Torok <edvin.torok@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 14:44:22 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=r4bp/7ySc1mZuC6x5fQsmmdEwzugaXFdliiErGFQUbs=; b=kYLlQzGB2elIBgVdjEVQSRXJmnCoJE1ImP7sfPOtT/ZabuZo4bKShwh3rw11cJ3fc3KO7udODi8yg64BV8H3axwLYyENV0x8t2GR7NhHVIQwoiH6iYH7UvzwRR6Qgh1gKREBrOUKp1jiXlzl3H6Iv0mfJYUwg/UjMGIWAxc5UeWMYHbmD8h82qOBrle6T8kyOc6G6HPSedu9uGlKm2UPM0LGlGvHEzswT6OvKatD0To6wFrMJVgSuFNu2eAwOqcUF6ntPrlvDc3452uc745RxJnqGX/o3Yl/mGGiP/mJ/jhHeKmb7oCh/RhB44jFyTqkUkrS+t+DS3jemfRV5L4TAA==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=bK/ODLFrXu6J6MHiUjo4p/OrZnkJsqVafMEnyo5Tzz7GoWfspfu8v4lfL5L2Ladm3kUt2xiXz3jT+VgzVDDbb/JfQmKiui3Y/qMpOd4b+as+oRTdTMB4CW6I5iyOZny5Zp6p+O4CcBhFCZc5EQAFFQ2egT/coQoH3wVj55hhuDVE8TdVzICruoDl7+AeDafq45fyV/W9Gg/rEWSP3tczp+ryL7p7yv9EULmbAUGkdMyCP4mUBGk6Qmyxh+VYqXyULw5prtP+5zvJVVvvL0V1HDw+E+hHv6waIooeFUnuTyJr+ymVmrFTIEQAdEAwV1YEfdBatj3dqIE3fLyNuyOBlQ==
  • Authentication-results: esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=pass (signature verified) header.i=@citrix.onmicrosoft.com
  • Cc: "iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx" <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, "julien@xxxxxxx" <julien@xxxxxxx>, "jbeulich@xxxxxxxx" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "wl@xxxxxxx" <wl@xxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 14:44:32 +0000
  • Ironport-sdr: 0/J18WMK2U1KEHWqsdrDjommoeFXYNKR9DYYQTXWbUuhU+clfXyc65cmECGslmjUX98GkjWqv+ 3Geh6+Kv9Hx5yxTVtzFcP+DgOV5pNdgbSYKE5RseeFFo3kmFYlVTeVJQ5sytzwEzZ7/MOoAy1T SRG859C8wLNu9O19k02HdjznQhmNg/jmgIPok4h/12jVpJnnY7kc69XxPqjPfrDI/FDF9o4Z2p oe+mhepNShZaoarAVaGecG1X6a2C+krqOgdz4C64PIRgrfFAV+FvQBMelvrsC5K9nTSUMvEoyp 2aw=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
  • Thread-index: AQHW643v723B+QH5KkG8kzEHFw+beqozpwuAgAAb/QA=
  • Thread-topic: [PATCH v2 3/8] docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md: clarify that deletes are recursive

On Fri, 2021-01-22 at 14:04 +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 15.01.21 23:28, Edwin Török wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Edwin Török <edvin.torok@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changed since V1:
> > * post publicly now that the XSA is out
> > ---
> >   docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md | 3 ++-
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md
> > b/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md
> > index 2ce2c836f5..f44bc0c61d 100644
> > --- a/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md
> > +++ b/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md
> > @@ -365,7 +365,8 @@ record previously present).
> >   |              | 0x0001: read                                   |
> >   |              | 0x0002: written                                |
> >   |              |                                                |
> > -|              | The value will be zero for a deleted node      |
> > +|              | The value will be zero for a recursively       |
> > +|              | deleted node                                   |
> 
> I don't see the value in this modification.
> 
> The wording is ambiguous: is the value zero only for nodes which were
> deleted due to recursion, or do you mean deletes are recursive?

I was looking at this from the point of view of generating the diff,
where you can optimize and reduce the size of the diff if you notice
that it is sufficient to add a record only for the topmost entry when
the entire subtree is deleted.

You are right that looking at it from the point of view of applying the
transaction record you would reuse the existing delete implementation
which is already recursive.

> 
> Per docs/misc/xenstore.txt all deletes are recursive, so there is no
> need to repeat that here. And a zero value only for the recursions
> makes
> no sense at all.
> 
> So I'd nack this patch.

We can drop it.
--Edwin
> 
> Juergen


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.