On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 16:20 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: (Backing up this thread a bit).
> > It seems like much of this would be candidates for adding to > > libxendevicemodel, but the underlying unstable interfaces pose a problem > > there. I'm going to leave this for another day. > > Does the Xen<->libxc interface need to be stable for libxendevicemodel > to have a stable ABI? > I think that libxendevicemodel could be stable, no matter what hypercall > is eventually called underneath. Am I missing something? I remember this morning why this matters, it's not the user space library ABI etc, but rather that if we want libxendevicemodel to be able to lock its fd to a specific domain (which we eventually do) then the kernel driver needs to be able to introspect the privcmd hypercalls[0] so the underlying hypercall does really need to be stable (since we don't want to be constantly reving the kernel driver when something changes). Given a stable hypercall interface underneath given the wrapping library a stable ABI is a no brainer. Ian. [0] or to provide a dedicate ioctl or something, either way it is the kernel which needs to be providing the lockdown functionality. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
