On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 12:35 +0000, George Dunlap wrote: > On 03/19/2015 12:29 PM, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > So, if I can ask, how about my idea of splitting alloc_ and init_ parts > > of pCPU initialization ? :-) > > Architecturally, from some points of view it makes sense > It does, doesn't it? That's why I like it: it fixes the issue we have, but in an architecturally sensible and non hackish way, IMO. > from > other points of view, it would be nicer not to multiply callbacks and > make the interface more complicated. > I see what you mean, and I agree. Well, from an arithmetic point of view, this will allow us to get rid of the .global_init hook, so the numbers of hook will be unchanged! ;-P Jokes apart, complexity has to be added to solve the issue, it's either this patch or the one from earlier in the thread which checked system_state==SYS_STATE_boot in csched2_alloc_pdata (with the added >= SYS_STATE_active for the cpupool case, of course). As you said in the first place, reducing dependencies, or at least making them easier to track, it's of some value, and I think the alloc_/init_ splitting approach goes in that direction. > But from a practical point of view, this path is already more work than > I was expecting it to be, so I don't think we should spend *too* much > time looking for alternatives. If that seems like the best option at > the moment, then I'm fine with it. > Great. I'll put a proper series together, and let's see how it'll look like. :-) Thanks and Regards, 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
