|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add supp
Keir,
I only saw the .init function called once. I downloaded xen-unstable on May
27. Were your updates after that?
Thanks,
Kathy Hadley
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 12:20 PM
> To: George Dunlap; Kathy Hadley
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Juergen Gross
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated
> to add support for CPU pools)
>
> On 16/06/2010 17:14, "George Dunlap" <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> >> I actually tried the xmalloc() method first. I found that when the
> >> .adjust_global function was called, the address of the "ops" data
> structure
> >> passed to that function was different from the address of the "ops"
> data
> >> structure when the .init function was called. I wanted to use
> .adjust_global
> >> to modify the data structure that was created when the .init
> function was
> >> called, but I could not figure out a way to get the address of the
> second
> >> data structure. Suggestions?
> >
> > It's been a month or two since I trawled through the cpupools code;
> > but I seem to recall that .init is called twice -- once for the
> > "default pool" (cpupool0), and once for an actually in-use pool.
> > (Juergen, can you correct me if I'm wrong?) Is it possible that
> > that's the difference in the pointers that you're seeing?
>
> 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.
> The fact that Kathy is seeing two different ops structures probably
> indicates that her xen-unstable tree is very out of date. Which may
> also
> mean that the patch will not apply to current tip.
>
> -- Keir
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), George Dunlap
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), George Dunlap
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools),
Kathy Hadley <=
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Kathy Hadley
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools), George Dunlap
|
|
|
|
|