> at the moment, xen_version hypercall returns only xen-version and > xen-subversion (as a long number). but there is xen-extraversion. so i > wonder if it is better for this hypercall to returns also > extraversion? (so the return value is a string, not a number)Hmmmm. Well the xen_version hypercall is used for OSes to determine the ABI of the version of Xen they''re running on (I think), so it kinda makes sense for that to be a long. For your xm info updates my personal preference would be to leave the version hypercall the same and to fetch the additional details with a new dom0 op in the common directory (would anyone have a problem with this?). The additional info would ideally allow the whole Xen version string to be pieced together, as displayed at boot e.g. "Xen version 3.0-devel (mwilli2@) (gcc version 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat 3.4.2-6.fc3)) Mon May 16 15:12:17 BST 2005" (like uname -a) Or a subset of that info. What do you think? Cheers, Mark> regards, > aq > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
hello, at the moment, xen_version hypercall returns only xen-version and xen-subversion (as a long number). but there is xen-extraversion. so i wonder if it is better for this hypercall to returns also extraversion? (so the return value is a string, not a number) regards, aq _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 4 Jun 2005, at 14:34, Mark Williamson wrote:> > The additional info would ideally allow the whole Xen version string > to be > pieced together, as displayed at boot e.g. > > "Xen version 3.0-devel (mwilli2@) (gcc version 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat > 3.4.2-6.fc3)) Mon May 16 15:12:17 BST 2005" > (like uname -a) > > Or a subset of that info. > > What do you think?xen_version() takes a command parameter. We can extend the comamnd enumeration (currently the command is always == 0) to be abel to find out other interesting stuff. -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 6/4/05, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:> > On 4 Jun 2005, at 14:34, Mark Williamson wrote: > > > > > The additional info would ideally allow the whole Xen version string > > to be > > pieced together, as displayed at boot e.g. > > > > "Xen version 3.0-devel (mwilli2@) (gcc version 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat > > 3.4.2-6.fc3)) Mon May 16 15:12:17 BST 2005" > > (like uname -a) > > > > Or a subset of that info. > > > > What do you think? > > xen_version() takes a command parameter. We can extend the comamnd > enumeration (currently the command is always == 0) to be abel to find > out other interesting stuff. >yes, i think this solution is cleaner than extending dom0-ops. i will work on it to let it returns extraversion when id=1 first. any other information we need, beside extraversion? regards, aq _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel