On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 02:46:10PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:20:56PM +0800, Eli Qiao wrote: > > This patch is based on Martin's cache branch. > > > > This patch amends the cache bank capability as follow: > > > > It helps a lot if you wait for a conclusion on a patch before sending > another version as soon as you can change one line. > > > <cache> > > <bank id='0' level='3' type='unified' size='15360' unit='KiB' cpus='0-5'> > > <control min='768' unit='KiB' type='unified' nallocations='4'/> > > </bank> > > <bank id='1' level='3' type='unified' size='15360' unit='KiB' cpus='6-11'> > > <control min='768' unit='KiB' type='unified' nallocations='4'/> > > </bank> > > </cache> > > > > I know Dan proposed "nallocations", but it sounds like one word. I > would rather use "allocations" or "max_allocs" or something > understandable. The reason for it? We have no documentation for our > capabilities XML. And nobody is trying to create one as far as I know. > So at least the naming should be more intuitive. I won't mind either of these alternatives. BTW, we really ought to fix the documentation gap too :-) I'm surprised we have gone so long without documenting this key area of functionality! Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
