On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 09:21 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Instead of open coding something like a linked list just use the
> available functionality from list.h.
>
Yep, much better.
> While adding the required new include to private.h sort the includes.
>
> Signed-off-by: From: Juergen Gross
>
On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 17:16 +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 04.12.20 17:13, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> >
> >
> > What I'd do is:
> > - add a comment here, explaining quickly exactly this fact, i.e.,
> > that it's not that we've forgotten to deal with this and it's
> > all
> > on purpose. Ac
On 04.12.20 17:13, Dario Faggioli wrote:
On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 10:18 +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
On 01.12.20 10:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
What guarantees that you managed to find an unused ID, other
than at current CPU speeds it taking too long to create 4
billion pools? Since you're doing this unde
On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 10:18 +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 01.12.20 10:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > What guarantees that you managed to find an unused ID, other
> > than at current CPU speeds it taking too long to create 4
> > billion pools? Since you're doing this under lock, wouldn't
> > it help an
On 01.12.20 10:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.2020 09:21, Juergen Gross wrote:
@@ -260,23 +257,42 @@ static struct cpupool *cpupool_create(
spin_lock(&cpupool_lock);
-for_each_cpupool(q)
+if ( poolid != CPUPOOLID_NONE )
{
-last = (*q)->cpupool_id;
-if
On 01.12.2020 09:21, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -260,23 +257,42 @@ static struct cpupool *cpupool_create(
>
> spin_lock(&cpupool_lock);
>
> -for_each_cpupool(q)
> +if ( poolid != CPUPOOLID_NONE )
> {
> -last = (*q)->cpupool_id;
> -if ( (poolid != CPUPOOLID_NONE)
Instead of open coding something like a linked list just use the
available functionality from list.h.
The allocation of a new cpupool id is not aware of a possible wrap.
Fix that.
While adding the required new include to private.h sort the includes.
Signed-off-by: From: Juergen Gross
---
V2:
-
