| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][RESUBMIT] don't schedule unplugged vcpus
On 8 Jun 2005, at 22:42, Ian Pratt wrote:
I don't see why we care about vcpus that are down. From the user's
point
of view they've gone for good -- it just happens that Xen hasn't freed
the memory in anticipation of it being used again. What do you think?
I'd be inclined just to enter '-1' in the vcpu_to_cpu map. BTW: we
could
make it an s16 rather than s32 at the same time. I think 32,768 CPUs
should keep be enough for anyone :-)
This is how I view it. We don't free the vcpu structure only because it
isn't reference counted. We can only be sure that noone has a reference
to the structure when the entire domain's refcnt falls to zero. Given
the small amount of memory involved, it's not worth the pain or
run-time cost of adding per-vcpu reference counts.
So VCPU_down == invisible outside Xen.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home