|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1 of 3] To be able to support arbitrary numbers o
On 10/06/10 15:41, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 12:21 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Juergen Gross wrote:
diff -r fe3018c6976d -r cfce8e755505 tools/libxl/libxl_internal.h
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_internal.h Mon Oct 04 12:52:14 2010 +0100
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_internal.h Tue Oct 05 14:19:13 2010 +0200
@@ -239,7 +239,6 @@
_hidden char *libxl__domid_to_name(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t domid);
_hidden char *libxl__poolid_to_name(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t poolid);
-
/* holds the CPUID response for a single CPUID leaf
* input contains the value of the EAX and ECX register,
* and each policy string contains a filter to apply to
we don't need this change
diff -r fe3018c6976d -r cfce8e755505 tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c
--- a/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c Mon Oct 04 12:52:14 2010 +0100
+++ b/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c Tue Oct 05 14:19:13 2010 +0200
@@ -3616,12 +3616,11 @@
static void vcpupin(char *d, const char *vcpu, char *cpu)
{
libxl_vcpuinfo *vcpuinfo;
- libxl_physinfo physinfo;
uint64_t *cpumap = NULL;
uint32_t vcpuid, cpuida, cpuidb;
char *endptr, *toka, *tokb;
- int i, nb_vcpu, cpusize;
+ int i, nb_vcpu, cpusize, cpumapsize;
vcpuid = strtoul(vcpu,&endptr, 10);
if (vcpu == endptr) {
@@ -3634,12 +3633,13 @@
find_domain(d);
- if (libxl_get_physinfo(&ctx,&physinfo) != 0) {
- fprintf(stderr, "libxl_get_physinfo failed.\n");
+ if ((cpusize = xc_get_max_cpus(ctx.xch)) == 0) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "xc_get_maxcpus failed.\n");
goto vcpupin_out1;
}
You shouldn't be calling xc functions directly from xl_cmdimpl.c.
The basic rule is: libxl clients (such as xl) shouldn't need to call any
library functions other than libxenlight's functions.
You can add a libxl_get_max_cpus function though.
Maybe we should add libxl_cpumap_alloc_phys which returns a libxl_cpumap
big enough to hold all physical CPUs, there are a few places within
libxl itself which might benefit from this, e.g. libxl_list_cpupool and
libxl_list_vcpu both call xc_get_max_cpus and then use the result as a
parameter to libxl_cpumap_alloc.
Actually, given that libxl_cpumap is only ever used for PCPUs perhaps
alloc should just always return a suitably sized map and there's no need
for the size parameter to libxl_cpumap_alloc? Is there any plausible
potential use for a libxl_cpumap of nrVCPU rather than nrPCPU ?
Currently there seems to be no demand for cpumasks larger than nrPCPU.
Changinf libxl_cpumap_alloc to allocate just the correct size seems
appropriate.
I think I'll do this in my planned cpumask rework.
Juergen
--
Juergen Gross Principal Developer Operating Systems
TSP ES&S SWE OS6 Telephone: +49 (0) 89 3222 2967
Fujitsu Technology Solutions e-mail: juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Domagkstr. 28 Internet: ts.fujitsu.com
D-80807 Muenchen Company details: ts.fujitsu.com/imprint.html
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home