On Fri, 2015-03-06 at 13:32 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 06.03.15 at 14:23, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote: > > Which means that, yes, this part of the condition must loose the '!', or > > have the arguments of the call to cpumask_subset() switched. I > > personally prefer the former: > > > > return !cpumask_subset(cpupool_online_cpumask(vc->domain->cpupool), > > vc->cpu_soft_affinity) && > > cpumask_subset(vc->cpu_soft_affinity, vc->cpu_hard_affinity) && > > cpumask_intersects(vc->cpu_soft_affinity, mask); > > The form without ! and with operands swapped isn't correct afaict, > since subset(x,y) is not the same as !subset(y,x). > I was thinking to loose the '!' and don't swap them, but...
> In particular > when the two are identical, they are also subsets of one another. > ... that is true, and is not the only issue the variant I suggested above would introduce. So forget it, '!' it is. :-) Dario
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
