Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC/RFT][PATCH 1 of 3] Move locking into pluggable schedulers.

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 17:09 +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:24 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > >  struct csched_private {
> > > +    /* lock for the whole pluggable scheduler, nests inside cpupool_lock 
> > > */
> > >      spinlock_t lock;
> > >      struct list_head active_sdom;
> > >      uint32_t ncpus;
> > 
> > Given that every scheduler plugin is going to need this lock perhaps it
> > could be provided globally (but still have the responsibility for using
> > it fall on the plugin)?
> > 
> Makes sense to me, and it should be something pretty easy to do, if you
> were thinking of just moving the lock to general code.
> I'm saying this because both credit and credit2 has much more payload in
> their `struct csched_private', and if we also want to get rid of the
> struct for them as well, that would be a different story! :-)

No, I just meant the lock.

> 
> > I was mainly thinking of the sedf case where you add and maintain the
> > whole structure for just that lock. Perhaps you have future plans which
> > involve having to do that anyway in which case maybe my suggestion
> > doesn't make sense.
> >
> I know and I agree, that 1-field-struct is just as ugly as hell! Reason
> why I went for it are homogeneity with the current code of all the
> schedulers, and yes, also, what you're saying above, i.e., it might turn
> useful in future to have some scheduler-wide repository in sedf as it is
> now for credit*. But no, I don't have _specific_ plans yet, so your
> comment do make sense.
> 
> Anyway, even if we'd stay with what's in this patch, I think this at
> least need some commenting...
> 
> Thanks and Regards,
> Dario
> 



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel