On 14/09/2017 13:58, Dario Faggioli wrote:
On Thu, 2017-09-14 at 08:42 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
--- a/tools/libxc/include/xenctrl.h
+++ b/tools/libxc/include/xenctrl.h
@@ -1077,17 +1077,21 @@ typedef struct xc_cpupoolinfo {
#define XC_CPUPOOL_POOLID_ANY 0xFFFFFFFF
+typedef xen_sysctl_sched_param_t xc_schedparam_t;
+
/**
* Create a new cpupool.
*
* @parm xc_handle a handle to an open hypervisor interface
* @parm ppoolid pointer to the new cpupool id (in/out)
* @parm sched_id id of scheduler to use for pool
+ * @parm sched_param parameter of the scheduler of the cpupool eg.
runq for credit2
I would drop "eg. runq for credit2"
+1
--- a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
+++ b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
@@ -1704,6 +1704,7 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_cpupool_create(XcObject
*self,
PyObject *kwds)
{
uint32_t cpupool = XC_CPUPOOL_POOLID_ANY, sched =
XEN_SCHEDULER_CREDIT;
+ xc_schedparam_t param;
static char *kwd_list[] = { "pool", "sched", NULL };
[..]
Another possibility would be to drop the cpupool python bindings
completely (which I would prefer, TBH).
+1
Juergen, please can you clarify on this. Do you mean that I should
remove the
complete cpupool handling from python APIs i.e remove all of pyxc_cpupool_*
APIs .
Also, it was some time back when I floated this patch. Does the
requirement to remove cpupool python bindings
still holds.
Regards,
Dario
Anshul
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
