[Xen-ia64-devel] Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [Patch] Fix IDLE issue with sedf scheduler on IA64

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 14 Jul 2005, at 15:48, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:

> So... an idle domain is a convenient abstraction which, it seems,
> results in every platform inconveniently adding code to work around
> the abstraction? ;-)
>
> Isn't it really the case that an idle domain/process is an 
> anachronistic
> concept that pre-dates "low power states" and is used by Xen mostly
> because Xen is leveraging OS scheduler designs (that also pre-date
> low power states)?  I recognize that that's still a perfectly
> reasonable design choice for Xen... just trying to ensure I
> understand.
I think that what you execute during idle time, and what state you 
save/restore, is orthogonal to how you represent the idle state to the 
scheduler and other subsystems in the hypervisor.
 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel