From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matt Wilson <msw@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xl: rename "list-vm" command to "vm-list"
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:07:10 -0700
Message-ID: <20120628170710.GC9080@US-SEA-R8XVZTX>
References: <5b1ed71c74d675866513.1340870362@kaos-source-31003.sea31.amazon.com>
	<20460.29531.933964.18000@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20460.29531.933964.18000@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:08:11AM -0700, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Matt Wilson writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xl: rename "list-vm" command to "vm-list""):
> > diff -r 32034d1914a6 -r 5b1ed71c74d6 docs/man/xl.pod.1
> > --- a/docs/man/xl.pod.1	Thu Jun 07 19:46:57 2012 +0100
> > +++ b/docs/man/xl.pod.1	Thu Jun 28 06:34:26 2012 +0000
> > @@ -617,6 +617,18 @@ different run state is appropriate.  Pin
> >  this, by ensuring certain VCPUs can only run on certain physical
> >  CPUs.
> >  
> > +=item B<vm-list>
> > +
> > +Prints information about all domains except for dom0.
> 
> Doesn't it also exclude dm stubdoms, service domains (stub xenstored),
> etc. ?  IMO it should, and the docs should say so.

The command uses libxl_list_vm(), which does skip stubdoms by checking
libxl_is_stubdom()

> If it doesn't then that's IMO a bug but stubdoms are a bit buggy
> anyway so I don't regard fixing that as a blocker for this patch.  But
> I think we should introduce docs that are correct.
> 
> If you and Ian agree, perhaps you'd like to clarify that (and perhaps
> change the usage message too).

v3, coming up.

Matt