| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation
On 10 Oct 2005, at 17:23, Ryan Harper wrote:
OK, that makes sense. I'll turn VCPUOP_create into set_max_vcpus(max)
which will create vcpus 1-(max-1). Any preference on the hypercall
name? Does set_max_vcpus() still make sense if it is also creating
vcpus?
How about DOM0_CREATEVCPUS and
do_createvcpus(struct domain* d, unsigned int max_vcpus).
I'm not fussed. I guess I have a slight preference for the latter
(createvcpus).
-- 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] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation,
Keir Fraser <=
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 2nd try: 0/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 2nd try: 1/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 2nd try: 2/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] 2nd try: 2/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Keir Fraser
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] 2nd try: 2/2 VCPU creation and allocation, Ryan Harper
|
|
|
| |
|
Home