On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 08:42:59PM +0900, Masayuki Sunou wrote: > Hi Dan > > > This looks like a bug in XenD that should be reported upstrem. If the > > hypercall > > is given an invalid value it should reject it and not screw up the whole > > host. > > > I agree. > I will consider it as a back log. > > > If we add this against the virConnectPtr object, we should name it > > > > virConnectGetVcpuMax() > > > > For consistency with other VCPU method naming. I wonder though, if we > > should > > > I contribute the patch that corrects the following again. > ?$B!& Correction of name of method and argument > --> Isn't the name bad? > ?$B!& Correction of position of method
This patch looks good me - unless anyone else on the list has objections I'll commit it to CVS later today. (I'll tweak the name of the internal xenHypervisorGetMaxVcpus method to add in 'Domain') Regards, Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
