[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/11] xen/arch/x86: clarify domid == 0 checks
>>> On 15.04.13 at 15:47, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/15/2013 04:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 12.04.13 at 23:04, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/time.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/time.c >>> @@ -1928,7 +1928,7 @@ void tsc_set_info(struct domain *d, >>> uint32_t tsc_mode, uint64_t elapsed_nsec, >>> uint32_t gtsc_khz, uint32_t incarnation) >>> { >>> - if ( is_idle_domain(d) || (d->domain_id == 0) ) >>> + if ( is_idle_domain(d) || is_hardware_domain(d) || is_control_domain(d) >>> ) >>> { >>> d->arch.vtsc = 0; >>> return; >>> @@ -2005,7 +2005,7 @@ static void dump_softtsc(unsigned char key) >>> "warp=%lu (count=%lu)\n", tsc_max_warp, tsc_check_count); >>> for_each_domain ( d ) >>> { >>> - if ( d->domain_id == 0 && d->arch.tsc_mode == TSC_MODE_DEFAULT ) >>> + if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && d->arch.tsc_mode == TSC_MODE_DEFAULT >>> ) >>> continue; >>> printk("dom%u%s: mode=%d",d->domain_id, >>> is_hvm_domain(d) ? "(hvm)" : "", d->arch.tsc_mode); >> >> I am of the opinion that the two checks should match, i.e. the >> second one should also become is_hardware || is_control. But >> I say this without really recalling why Dom0 is being special cased >> here in the first place. > > Since this is just an output function, my best guess is to avoid displaying > dom0 statistics that aren't relevant for a query that is intended for domUs, > so it doesn't really matter what is tested. Right now it doesn't, but the ultimate goal is for is_control_domain() and is_hardware_domain() to check different aspects. The latter seems to be the correct fit here, so I suppose the first check above should also test just that. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |