On 26/06/2018 14:16, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 26.06.18 at 14:42, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 26/06/18 13:04, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 26.06.18 at 13:09, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> Future changes will introduce a new SILO mode, which is intended to be >>>> useful >>>> for cloud and enterprise setups where all domUs are unprivileged and have >>>> no >>>> buisness communicating directly. >>>> >>>> This was discussed at XenSummit, but I'll leave further details to the >>>> series >>>> which introduces it. However, to begin with, clean up the XSM namespacing >>>> to >>>> better separate XSM and FLASK. >>>> >>>> No functional change. >>>> >>>> Andrew Cooper (2): >>>> xen/xsm: Rename CONFIG_FLASK_* to CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_* >>>> xen/xsm: Rename CONIFIG_XSM_POLICY to CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_POLICY >>> I don't particularly mind the change, but I also don't view it as >>> particularly useful: For the first patch I'd see the point if you >>> meant to introduce some CONFIG_ABC_FLASK, but that's not how >>> I understand the description there. For the second I don't see >>> the point of retaining XSM in the name. >> XSM != Flask, and this is the naming confusion trying to be rectified. > But why is FLASK alone not meaningful enough? > >> CONFIG_XSM_SILO is going to be the introduced new mode. > And then SILO alone here?
FLASK and SILO alone are meaningful to the core maintainers/developers, but only because they're aware (even if only tangentially) of all the development work going on. By namespacing with an XSM, it is far clearer as to the hierarchy of named features. This particular rename came about as a direct result of my observation of a room full of confused developers as to exactly where the split of various features lay. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
