On 03/05/2016 01:00 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Changlong Xie writes ("[PATCH v11 10/27] tools/libxl: add back channel support to
write stream"):
From: Wen Congyang <we...@cn.fujitsu.com>
Add back channel support to write stream. If the write stream is
a back channel stream, this means the write stream is used by
Secondary to send some records back.
The general idea seems fine to me but I want an opinion from Andrew.
If I'm not mistaken there is no call site for this yet. In which case
this should be mentioned in the commit message.
ok
Thanks
-Xie
+/*----- checkpoint state -----*/
+void libxl__stream_write_checkpoint_state(libxl__egc *egc,
+ libxl__stream_write_state *stream,
+ libxl_sr_checkpoint_state *srcs)
Firstly, missing blank line.
Secondly, reading all this leads me to think that maybe the
`checkpoint_state' record should be called something different. Is it
only ever going to be used for COLO ? Maybe it should be
`COLOHA_STATE' or something (and all the functions etc. renamed
consequently) ?
What do you think ?
Thanks,
Ian.
.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
