[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][RESUBMIT] don't schedule unplugged vcpus
* Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [2005-06-08 17:07]: > > On 8 Jun 2005, at 23:00, Ryan Harper wrote: > > >So, when I trigger a vcpu to go down via dom0 xm operation, I have to > >trust that it worked? I have no way of knowing at some point later > >which vcpus are up or down? I don't see any cost to this other than > >during the getdominfo hcall. > > The ones you can retrieve info about are up. The ones you can't, are > down. :-) Indeed. =) > Let me put it this way: I reserve the right in future to change my mind > and free the vcpu info structures for vcpus that are down (and > re-allocate when they come back up). If I do that then you will not get > info about them via hypercalls. There's no good reason to return info > about them -- you can infer they are 'down'/non-existent from their > absence -- so why bother? It seemed nicer/easier/cheaper (to me) to mark up/down in the dominfo hypercall rather than issue MAX_VIRT_CPUS vcpucontext hypercalls. -- Ryan Harper Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center IBM Corp., Austin, Tx (512) 838-9253 T/L: 678-9253 ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |