On 17/03/17 18:19, Dario Faggioli wrote: > Clarify and enforce (with ASSERTs) when the function > is called on the idle domain, and explain in comments > what it means and when it is ok to do so. > > While there, change the name of the function to a more > self-explanatory one, and do the same to VCPU2OP. > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> > --- > Cc: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> > Cc: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com> > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > --- > Changes from v1: > - new patch; > - renamed VCPU2OP, as suggested during v1's review of patch 1. > --- > xen/common/schedule.c | 56 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/common/schedule.c b/xen/common/schedule.c > index d344b7c..fdb8ff4 100644 > --- a/xen/common/schedule.c > +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c > @@ -77,8 +77,25 @@ static struct scheduler __read_mostly ops; > (( (opsptr)->fn != NULL ) ? (opsptr)->fn(opsptr, ##__VA_ARGS__ ) \ > : (typeof((opsptr)->fn(opsptr, ##__VA_ARGS__)))0 ) > > -#define DOM2OP(_d) (((_d)->cpupool == NULL) ? &ops : > ((_d)->cpupool->sched)) > -static inline struct scheduler *VCPU2OP(const struct vcpu *v) > +static inline struct scheduler *dom_get_scheduler(const struct domain *d)
Hmm -- I agree that VCPU2OP is probably not the right name, but I'm not a fan of the new name either; and I don't have an option I like better yet. With your permission I'll check in the first patch and come back to this. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
