On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 10:23:13AM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> Ewan Mellor <ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 01/30/2007 10:12:10 AM:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:29:47AM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> >
> > > This patch aligns vTPM support in the Xen-API, documentation and
> lib-xen
> > > (after the recent changes).
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > What's the intention here? You've removed the get_instance calls, but
> not the
> > instance field from the documentation. Assuming that that's just a
> mistake,
> > and you meant to remove the instance field, we're left with a VTPM class
> that
> > has nothing other than a reference to a VM and a reference to a backend
> > domain. What are the semantics of that object now?
>
> The instance will remain to be assigned by the hotplug scripts. In the
> old-style of VM configuration file one could still pass it as parameter,
> but its ignored. I rather not have it passed in as a parameter by the
> Xen-API, either. From what I can see a getter for it is not useful,
> either, since I want the instance number to be hidden from management
> software.
What we're left with seems like a pretty expensive way of saying "VTPM_backend
= N". Is there really nothing else that's configurable? We could just put
this into VM.other_config if that's the only thing that you need, which would
make configuring a VTPM a lot easier.
Ewan.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel