From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/23] libxl: events: Provide libxl__ev_evtchn* Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 11:52:08 +0000 Message-ID: <21172.12136.855088.478931@mariner.uk.xensource.com> References: <1387305337-15355-1-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> <1387305337-15355-11-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> <1387460612.9925.75.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <21171.12604.288109.290100@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <1387475496.17289.15.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1387475496.17289.15.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: Shriram Rajagopalan , George Dunlap , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/23] libxl: events: Provide libxl__ev_evtchn*"): > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 17:47 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Leaving it as "int" means that the caller can put -1 in it if the > > struct isn't in use or the port not allocated. That avoids the caller > > needing to have a separate copy of the value, or a separate boolean. > > And later, we do. > > I suppose that's vaguely the same sort of thing as > evtchn_port_or_error_t, but not quite. Yes. > > The latter. I'm open to suggestions for improved wording. > > "waiting must only be done via libxl__ev_..." not much better though. I will change it to: xc_evtchn *xce; /* waiting must be done only with libxl__ev_evtchn* */ Thanks, Ian.