Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] xl doesn't honour the parameter cpu_weight from my config file while xm does honour it

[Dieter Bloms <dieter@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 24, Ian Campbell wrote:

> I think you mean cpu_weight rather than cpu-weight.

yes of course, fixed.

> =item B<latency=N>
> 
> I think you missed the value here.

I don't know the value for it, so I added N as you suggested.

> > +    ("us", KeyedUnion(None, libxl_scheduler, "sched",
> > +                 [("credit", libxl_sched_credit_domain),
> > +                 ("credit2", libxl_sched_credit2_domain),
> > +                 ("sedf", libxl_sched_sedf_domain),
> > +                 ("arinc653", libxl_sched_arinc653_domain),
> > +                 ], keyvar_init_val = "-1")),
> 
> I don't think a KeyedUnion is right here, since the user of libxl
> doesn't really have a choice about which scheduler is in user (that's
> set at boot time or via cpupool interfaces).
> 
> You could use a Union, but below I'll make an argument that perhaps a
> Struct would be better.

Hm, but when I don't use a union with the structure for each scheduler I
have to create a structure depend of scheduler at runtime, because the
functions libxl_sched_XXXXXX_domain_set use there own structure for
their scheduler.

I've create a new function libxl__sched_set_params, which set the params
depend on the scheduler as you suggested.

I'am not a software developer, so please be forbear with me.

Here my next try.

-- 
Best regards

  Dieter

--
I do not get viruses because I do not use MS software.
If you use Outlook then please do not put my email address in your
address-book so that WHEN you get a virus it won't use my address in the
From field.

Attachment: add_support_for_cpu_weight_config_in_xl.diff
Description: Text Data

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel