Re: [PATCH V7 3/7] libxl: add pvusb API

From: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: jgross@suse.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com,
	george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com, Chunyan Liu <cyliu@suse.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org, jfehlig@suse.com,
	Simon Cao <caobosimon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 3/7] libxl: add pvusb API
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 16:16:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <22038.35049.922735.643817@mariner.uk.xensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1444316047.1410.220.camel@citrix.com>

Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH V7 3/7] libxl: add pvusb API"):
> Since this is part of a new "controller" abstraction we do in theory have
> the freedom to do things differently, but it seems to me that having
> something as basic as the list operation differ for devices vs. controller
> would do more harm than good even if the controller interface is strictly
> better. IOW I'm willing to be convinced otherwise but right now I'm pretty
> sure how it is above is the preferable extension to our API.

Hrm.  OK, I guess :-/.

> > > +            tmp = READ_BACKEND(gc, "num-ports");
> > > +            if (!tmp) goto outerr;
> > > +            usbctrl->ports = atoi(tmp);
> > 
> > There are 4 nearly identical stanzas here.  I think a more
> > comprehensive would be helpful.  Maybe a global macro READ_SUBPATH_INT
>                ^MACRO?

Yes.

Ian.