Re: [PATCH v8 0/9] remove libxenctrl usage from xenstored

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 06.03.2025 00:32, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 25.02.25 12:10, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> Ping? Especially ...
>>>
>>> On 04.02.25 12:33, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>> Xenstored is using libxenctrl for only one purpose: to get information
>>>> about state of domains.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series is removing that dependency by introducing a new
>>>> stable interface which can be used by xenstored instead.
>>>>
>>>> There was a RFC series sent out 3 years ago, which I have taken as a
>>>> base and by addressing all comments from back then.
>>>>
>>>> The main differences since that RFC series are:
>>>>
>>>> - Instead of introducing an new main hypercall for a stable management
>>>>    interface I have just added a new domctl sub-op, as requested in 2021.
>>>>
>>>> - I have added a new library libxenmanage for easy use of the new
>>>>    stable hypervisor interface. Main motivation for adding the library
>>>>    was the recent attempt to decouple oxenstored from the Xen git tree.
>>>>    By using the new library, oxenstored could benefit in the same way as
>>>>    xenstored from the new interface: it would be possible to rely on
>>>>    stable libraries only.
>>>>
>>>> - Mini-OS has gained some more config options recently, so it was rather
>>>>    easy to make xenstore[pvh]-stubdom independent from libxenctrl, too.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that the last 4 patches can be committed only after the
>>>> related Mini-OS patch "config: add support for libxenmanage" has gone in
>>>> AND the Mini-OS commit-id has been updated in Config.mk accordingly! The
>>>> Mini-OS patch has been Acked already, so it can go in as soon as patch
>>>> 5 of this series (the one introducing libxenmanage) has been committed.
>>>>
>>>> As patches 1 and 2 change current behavior, Jan didn't want to give his
>>>> Ack (he didn't reject the patch either). So I'm asking other "Rest"
>>>> maintainers to look at those patches specifically.
>>>
>>> ... patches 1 and 2 could need an additional opinion.
>>
>> And another ping.
>>
>> One of Andrew, Stefano, Julien, Roger, Anthony, Mical: Please have a look.
>>
>> The related discussion between Jan and me can be found here (patches 2 and 
>> 3):
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20250107101711.5980-1-jgross@xxxxxxxx/
> 
> I didn't do an in-details review but based on Jan's comments and your
> replies, I think they are an improvement. If someone else wants to do a
> proper review, they would be welcome.
> 
> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>

I've taken the conservative approach and interpreted this as an ack for the
two patches in question only, rather than the entire series. Please indicate
if it was meant the other way around, as then the final 3 patches could also
go in.

Jan