On 03.04.2020 17:20, Paul Durrant wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >> Sent: 30 March 2020 11:54 >> To: Paul Durrant <p...@xen.org> >> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com>; >> Wei Liu <w...@xen.org> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] tools/misc: add xen-ctx to present domain context >> >> On 27.03.2020 19:50, Paul Durrant wrote: >>> This tools is analogous to 'xen-hvmctx' which presents HVM context. >>> Subsequent patches will add 'dump' functions when new records are >>> introduced. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <p...@xen.org> >>> --- >>> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com> >>> Cc: Wei Liu <w...@xen.org> >>> --- >>> .gitignore | 1 + >>> tools/misc/Makefile | 4 ++ >>> tools/misc/xen-ctx.c | 144 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Is xen-ctx a good choice of a name, considering we already have not >> only xen-hvmctx, but also xenctx? If the new functionality isn't a >> good fit for either, perhaps its name would better reflect its >> connection to save/restore records? xen-sr-dump looks pretty clumsy >> to me, but still seems better than a name easily mixed up with >> others. > > How about xen-domctx?
Hmm, maybe. Seeing this is about PV pieces, xen-pvctx might also be an option. Jan
