On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 09:38:39AM +0800, Eli Qiao wrote:
On Thursday, 6 April 2017 at 8:46 PM, 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.Okay, I will keep my patience next time, this time is just because I was working over time yesterday.> <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.yep, I will wait for the final decision.> Along with vircaps2xmltest case updated. I'm sensing you haven't ran the tests. Am I right?Why ? taget@s2600wt:~/libvirt$ ./tests/vircaps2xmltest TEST: vircaps2xmltest .... 4 OK
All tests, not just one ;) That's why they're there =) (hint: virschematest)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
