On 2025-07-17 13:51, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
Make alloc_dom0_vcpu0() viable as a general vcpu0 allocator. Keep
behaviour on any hwdom/ctldom identical to that dom0 used to have, and
make non-dom0 have auto node affinity.
Rename the function to alloc_dom_vcpu0() to reflect this change in
scope, and move the prototype to asm/domain.h from xen/domain.h as it's
only used in x86.
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsm...@apertussolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavall...@amd.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/dom0_build.c | 12 ++++++++----
xen/arch/x86/include/asm/dom0_build.h | 5 +++++
xen/arch/x86/setup.c | 6 ++++--
xen/include/xen/domain.h | 1 -
4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/dom0_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/dom0_build.c
index 0b467fd4a4..dfae7f888f 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/dom0_build.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/dom0_build.c
@@ -254,12 +254,16 @@ unsigned int __init dom0_max_vcpus(void)
return max_vcpus;
}
-struct vcpu *__init alloc_dom0_vcpu0(struct domain *dom0)
+struct vcpu *__init alloc_dom_vcpu0(struct domain *d)
{
- dom0->node_affinity = dom0_nodes;
- dom0->auto_node_affinity = !dom0_nr_pxms;
+ d->auto_node_affinity = true;
+ if ( is_hardware_domain(d) || is_control_domain(d) )
Do we want dom0 options to apply to:
hardware or control
just hardware
just dom0 (hardware && control && xenstore)
?
I think "just dom0" may make the most sense. My next preference is just
hardware. Control I think should be mostly a domU except for having
is_privileged = true;
The rest of the patch looks good.
Regards,
Jason
