On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 01:39:18PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 05/09/18 13:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 05.09.18 at 14:04, wrote:
> >> On 05/09/18 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
> The path which blows up is:
>
> arch_domain_destroy()
>
On 05/09/18 13:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 05.09.18 at 14:04, wrote:
>> On 05/09/18 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
On 13/08/18 11:01, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> This is in preparation to set up d->max_cpus and d->vcpu[] in
> domain_create(),
> and a
>>> On 05.09.18 at 14:04, wrote:
> On 05/09/18 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
>>> On 13/08/18 11:01, Andrew Cooper wrote:
This is in preparation to set up d->max_cpus and d->vcpu[] in
domain_create(),
and allow later parts of domain construction to ha
On 05/09/18 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
>> On 13/08/18 11:01, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> This is in preparation to set up d->max_cpus and d->vcpu[] in
>>> domain_create(),
>>> and allow later parts of domain construction to have access to the values.
>>>
>>> Signed-o
>>> On 05.09.18 at 09:24, wrote:
On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
>> Unlike the boolean-nature rangeset_contains_*() helpers, I don't think
>> it is reasonable to make rangeset_remove_*() tolerate a NULL rangeset.
>
> +1
Hmm, upon further thought: rangeset_remove_*() is a no-op on an
empty ran
>>> On 04.09.18 at 20:44, wrote:
> On 13/08/18 11:01, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> This is in preparation to set up d->max_cpus and d->vcpu[] in
>> domain_create(),
>> and allow later parts of domain construction to have access to the values.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper
>> ---
>> CC: Jan Beuli
