On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:13:06PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 11/26/2015 09:59 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > libxlConnectDomainXMLFromNative calls both xenParseXM and xenParseXL > > with cfg->verInfo->xen_version_major, however AFAICT they both (either > > inherently, or through there use of xenParseConfigCommon expect a > > value from xenConfigVersionEnum (which does not correspond to > > xen_version_major). > > I recall being a little apprehensive about using xen_version_major when writing > the code, and apparently that was justified. But now that we are revisiting > this, I wonder if we care about these old xend config versions at all. Is anyone > even running Xen 3.0.x, or 3.1.x, particularly with a newish libvirt? IMO we > could drop all of this xend config nonsense and go with the code associated with > the last xend config version, i.e. XEND_CONFIG_VERSION_3_1_0. > > And while mentioning dropping support for these old xend config versions, do I > dare mention dropping the xend driver altogether? :-) It will certainly need to > be done some day. Question is whether that's a bit premature now. We just decided to drop QEMU driver code supporting for RHEL-5 vintage distros, requiring RHEL-6 as minimum. So I think it is entirely reasonable to drop Xen driver code supporting similar vintage XenD. That would certainly simplify or even eliminate the current crazy xend_config_version code we have I think we need to continue suppoorting XenD driver for a while, but at least you can simplify the code shared with libxl. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list