On 7/5/11 10:14 PM, Colin Percival wrote:
 On 07/05/11 19:42, Colin Percival wrote:
> On 07/05/11 19:04, Justin T. Gibbs wrote:
>> On 7/5/11 7:14 PM, Colin Percival wrote:
>>> Maybe the right option is to have a loader tunable dev.xn.linuxback to
>>> control which version of the protocol is used?
>>
>> What a mess.
>
> Yep. Mess or not, shall I go ahead with having a loader tunable
control this,
> or can you think of a better solution?

Does anyone object to the attached patch? It keeps the differing
behaviour to
a minimum -- we MUST set ring-ref with a FreeBSD blkback, and we MUST
NOT set
it with a linux blkback -- but otherwise errs in the direction of
setting more
 variables than are needed, to maximize the possibility of a future blkback
 being compatible with both blkback_is_linux=0 and blkback_is_linux=1.

It would be better to just change the FreeBSD blkback driver to be
compatible with the RedHat convention.

I'm still unclear on why the current FreeBSD blkfront driver believes
that it can use more than one page in your configuration given that the
RedHat blkfront doesn't advertise this capability in a way that the FreeBSD
blkfront understands (max-ring-pages isn'te set by blkback).  Did you do
something to force blkfront to use more than one page?

--
Justin

_______________________________________________
freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to