From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@citrix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 09:41:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56C6022D02000078000D3C93@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22213.61728.672908.181165@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
>>> On 18.02.16 at 17:28, <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?"):
>> I think we come to the conclusion that these HVMOPs should be made
>> stable. And to do so I'm going to introduce a __XEN_TOOLS_STABLE__ macro
>> for them to distinguish from __XEN_TOOLS__. And then libxendevicemodel
>> will have -D__XEN_TOOLS_STABLE__ only.
>>
>> Does this sound sufficient?
>
> It would be better to rename -D__XEN_TOOLS__ too, to
> -D__XEN_TOOLS_UNSTABLE.
Even if a minor one, this will create a compatibility problem for
out of tree code including the headers: Their builds will all of
the sudden break, until they figure they need to go and
#define this new manifest symbol. Otoh maybe we would
actually like to break their builds this way, to make them aware
of the fact. In which case maybe __XEN_TOOLS__ should be
retained for the stable portions?
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-18 17:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-17 17:28 Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs? Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:24 ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:37 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:45 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:53 ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:55 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:56 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:31 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:36 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 10:44 ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-18 10:55 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 10:59 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 11:04 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-18 12:51 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:28 ` Ian Jackson
2016-02-18 16:29 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:41 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2016-02-18 16:45 ` Ian Jackson
2016-02-18 16:49 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-18 16:37 ` Ian Campbell
2016-02-19 16:05 ` Domctl and physdevop for passthrough (Was: Re: Stabilising some tools only HVMOPs?) Wei Liu
2016-02-22 11:28 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-22 11:56 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 14:31 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 15:46 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:09 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-23 17:24 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:28 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 17:55 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-29 12:23 ` Wei Liu
2016-02-29 12:29 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-29 18:12 ` Wei Liu
2016-03-01 7:54 ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-01 10:52 ` Wei Liu
2016-03-01 11:10 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56C6022D02000078000D3C93@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=Paul.Durrant@citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=anthony.perard@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.