On Fri, 2016-01-08 at 15:54 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 08/01/16 15:47, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > And the hypervisor did build with: > > > > [konrad@char xen]$ nm --defined xen-syms |grep schedulers > > ffff82d080290d58 D __end_schedulers_array > > ffff82d080290d58 D __start_schedulers_array > > > > :-) > > > > Not exactly sure if there is some way to make us _not_ shoot > > ourselves in the foot by mistake. > > > > Perhaps the build should complain if the size of the > > __schedulers_array is zero? > > Hmm yes - an ASSERT() at the bottom of the linker file would be a > very > good defensive measure. > +1
> A hypervisor without any schedulers compiled in will be rather sad. > Well, it depends on how many pCPUs the host you want to run the hypervisor on has: if it has 0 of them, no scheduler at all is the perfect solution... not to mention that the combination of these things (0 CPUs and no scheduling), would make a lot of issues just instantly disappear! :-D Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
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
