On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
> On 12/11/14 15:31, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > This patch series aims to clean up the mem_event subsystem within Xen. > The > > original use-case for this system was to allow external helper > applications > > running in privileged domains to control various memory operations > performed > > by Xen. Amongs these were paging, sharing and access control. The > subsystem > > has since been extended to also deliver non-memory related events, namely > > various HVM debugging events (INT3, MTF, MOV-TO-CR). The structures and > naming > > of related functions however has not caught up to these new use-cases, > thus > > leaving many ambigouities in the code. > > > > In this series we convert the mem_event structures to a union of > sub-structures > > which clearly define the scope of information that is transmitted via > the event > > delivery mechanism. Afterwards, we clean up the naming of the structures > and > > related functions to more clearly be in line with their actual > operations. > > > > This PATCH RFC series is also available at: > > https://github.com/tklengyel/xen/tree/mem_event_cleanup > > > > <snip> > > > xen/include/public/domctl.h | 44 +-- > > xen/include/public/hvm/params.h | 2 +- > > xen/include/public/mem_event.h | 134 ------- > > xen/include/public/memory.h | 6 +- > > xen/include/public/vm_event.h | 179 +++++++++ > > While in principle I think this series is a very good thing, there is a > problem with editing the pubic header files. > > The contents of mem_event.h is not currently hidden behind #ifdef > __XEN_TOOLS__ > > As a result, it is strictly speaking part of the VM-visible public > API/ABI and not permitted to change in a backwards incompatible manor. > > Having said that, it is currently only usable by privileged domains, so > there is an argument to be made for declaring that it should have been > hidden behind __XEN_TOOLS__ in the first place, making it permittable to > change. > > ~Andrew > I agree, I think it's safe to say most users of mem_event.h already made use of it in conjuction with xenctrl.h which is already behind __XEN_TOOLS__. Going forward we should probably have this header behind __XEN_TOOLS__ as well just to be explicit. Tamas
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
