Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools)

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 17/06/2010 06:02, "Juergen Gross" <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Oh yes, that was the old behaviour. I took a hatchet to the
>> scheduler/cpupool interfaces a few weeks ago and now we should only
>> initialise the scheduler once, unless extra cpupools are manually created.
> 
> Keir, what do you think about creating an "idle-scheduler" for the cpus not in
> any cpupool? It would only schedule the idle vcpu and could be VERY minimal.
> This could reduce the complexity of moving cpus from and to cpupools.
> 
> I could try to setup a patch if you support this idea (I'm asking for your
> opinion before starting this, as I'm rather busy with other tasks).

What we have now is fine (which is, basically, cpupool0 and the 'no-cpupool'
schedulers are one and the same thing). I don't want yet another scheduler
thanks. ;-)

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel