On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:22:39AM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
[...]
> >>Yeah, we can deprecate that field. But we need to take care to not break
> >>users of the old field.
> >Ok, what name would you suggest?
>
> I would suggest b_info->u.acpi
>
b_info->acpi would be more appropriate.
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
index ef614be..a57823d 100644
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
@@ -494,11 +494,16 @@ libxl_domain_build_info = Struct("domain_build_info",[
# Note that the partial device tree should avoid to use the phandle
# 65000 which is reserved by the toolstack.
("device_tree", string),
+ ("acpi", libxl_defbool),
("u", KeyedUnion(None, libxl_domain_type, "type",
[("hvm", Struct(None, [("firmware", string),
("bios", libxl_bios_type),
("pae", libxl_defbool),
("apic", libxl_defbool),
+ # The following acpi field is
+ # deprecated. Please use the unified
+ # acpi field above which works for both
+ # x86 and ARM.
("acpi", libxl_defbool),
("acpi_s3", libxl_defbool),
("acpi_s4", libxl_defbool),
And then:
1. modify xl to set the new field.
2. modify libxl to handle compatibility: user of the old field should
continue to work.
I know this is a bit terse. Feel free to ask questions if you have any
doubt.
Wei.
> Regards,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
