[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/6] eliminate cpu_set()
>>> On 07.11.11 at 15:48, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/11/2011 14:39, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> I don't like set_cpu_{present,online} taking a boolean clear/set flag. There >>> is no caller that can both set and clear a flag, so it is always hardcoded >>> as 0 or 1. And then the reader has to make a (probably not hard) guess what >>> that means. >>> >>> If you must add an abstraction interface here, better to define four of >>> them: {set,clear}_cpu_{present,online}. >> >> Hmm, I don't like this interface design too much either, but again wanted >> to follow Linux rather than cooking our own. Do you really want us to >> diverge in this respect? > > Yes. Apart from maybe the code that tickles the remote APIC, our smpboot > code is already well diverged from Linux. In that case I'd prefer not having a separate abstraction here at all - is that fine by you? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |