On 03/14/2012 06:12 AM, Guannan Ren wrote:
On 03/14/2012 05:10 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 03/14/2012 03:02 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:06:38PM +0800, Alex Jia wrote:
>>> On 03/14/2012 01:57 PM, Guannan Ren wrote:
>>>> dom.cPUStats(True, 0)
>>> I'd like getVcpuStats or cpuStats function naming.
>> Based on existing conventions, it should be getVcpuStats() method,
> getVcpuStats is wrong - if flags is 0, we are getting stats on the
> physical cpu of the host, not the vcpu of the guest.
>
> I think we want getCpuStats.
>
getCPUStats is occupied by virNodeGetCPUStates. Renaming it is not
good idea.
It probably impact on those calling python code.
No it won't - you get the right stats according to which object you call
the method on. Remember that python is object oriented. There's a
difference between:
conn.getCPUStats => virNodeGetCPUStats
and
dom.getCPUStats => virDomainGetCPUStats
However, this _does_ point out that for consistent capitalization with
existing python bindings, we want to name it getCPUStats, not getCpuStats.
I propose getDomCPUStates, what do you think about it?
No, getCPUStats is sufficient. And careful to avoid typos - it's Stats,
not States.
--
Eric Blake eblake(a)redhat.com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library
http://libvirt.org