From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Use system blktap Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 15:21:38 +0100 Message-ID: <1436278898.25646.213.camel@citrix.com> References: <1436179903-449-1-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1436179903-449-1-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.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: George Dunlap Cc: Wei Liu , Felipe Franciosi , Dave Scott , Jonathan Ludlam , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Ian Jackson , Roger Pau Monne List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 11:51 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > George Dunlap (6): > libxl: Make local_initiate_attach more rational > libxl: Remove linux udev rules > tools: Add a block-tap script for setting up tapdisks via tap-ctl > libxl: Use the block-tap script for LIBXL_DISK_BACKEND_TAP > tools: Remove in-tree blktap2 > libxl: Add more logging to hotplug script path Could some subset of this series safely go in now? I'm thinking in particular of: libxl: Make local_initiate_attach more rational libxl: Add more logging to hotplug script path Which look useful and standalone, assuming the first doesn't need any of the rest. I'm not sure if the udev stuff makes sense without the blktap script stuff (which appears to need a little more discussion if nothing else). I'll take it if you say it is safe to do so... Ian.