>>> On 16.05.19 at 14:46, wrote:
> On 16/05/2019 14:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 06.05.19 at 08:56, wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> @@ -314,14 +314,42 @@ static struct sched_item *sched_alloc_item(struct
>>> vcpu *v)
>>> return NULL;
>>> }
>>>
On 16/05/2019 14:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 06.05.19 at 08:56, wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
>> @@ -314,14 +314,42 @@ static struct sched_item *sched_alloc_item(struct vcpu
>> *v)
>> return NULL;
>> }
>>
>> -int sched_init_vcpu(struct vcpu *v,
>>> On 06.05.19 at 08:56, wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
> @@ -314,14 +314,42 @@ static struct sched_item *sched_alloc_item(struct vcpu
> *v)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> -int sched_init_vcpu(struct vcpu *v, unsigned int processor)
> +static unsigned int
Today there are two distinct scenarios for vcpu_create(): either for
creation of idle-domain vcpus (vcpuid == processor) or for creation of
"normal" domain vcpus (including dom0), where the caller selects the
initial processor on a round-robin scheme of the allowed processors
(allowed being based
