Re: [v10][PATCH 11/16] tools/libxl: detect and avoid conflicts with RDM

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>]

Chen, Tiejun writes ("Re: [v10][PATCH 11/16] tools/libxl: detect and avoid conflicts with RDM"):
> [Ian Jackson:]
> > That is, an address would be reserved if it was reserved in any of the
> > rdm regions implied by the config.
> 
> Are you saying this point?
> 
> "The union of two sets A and B is the set of elements which are in A, in 
> B, or in both A and B."

Yes.

> > The explicitly specified regions might overlap with the computed ones,
> > without being identical. Computing the union would not be entirely
> > trivial.
> 
> Just to your example,
> 
>    libxl_domain_config cfg;
>    cfg.stuff = blah;
>    cfg.rdm.strategy = HOST;
> 
>    libxl_domain_create_new(&cfg, &domid);
>    libxl_domain_destroy(domid);
> 
> Here looks you mean d_config->rdms would be changed, right? Currently 
> this shouldn't be allowed. But I think we need to further discussion 
> make this case clear after feature freeze since we didn't have this kind 
> of assumption in our previous design.
> 
>    libxl_domain_create_new(&cfg, &domid);

This response of yours does not lead me to think you have understood
what I am saying, but I agree that this can be dealt with later (if
indeed it needs to be dealt with at all).

Ian.