>I raise my hand as a volunteer.
>About vcpu timer migration issue.
>Since it is same as domU.
Hi sakai,
Thanks in advance, a small comment,
The migration maybe same, please note the implementation of
vcpu timer is not
same. vcpu timer on VTI domain is using a ac_timer, domU is
not.
Thanks,
Anthony
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Atsushi SAKAI [mailto:sakaia jp.fujitsu.com]
>Sent: 2006?7?28? 15:07
>To: Xu, Anthony; Isaku Yamahata; You, Yongkang
>Cc: xen-ia64-devel lists.xensource.com
>Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] Xen/IA64 Healthiness
Report-Cset#10811:
>254c090854de
>
>Hi,
>
>I raise my hand as a volunteer.
>About vcpu timer migration issue.
>Since it is same as domU.
>
>Thanks
>Atsushi SAKAI
>
>>>- struct arch_vmx_struct::vtm
>>> VTI domain code seems to assume that
vtime_t::vtm_timer is running on
>>> same physical cpu of its vcpu.
>>> Probably the attached patch is needed for
credit scheduler.
>>> It is only compile tested.
>>You are right, current virtual timer for VTI domain
doesn't support migration.
>>That will be great, if you would like to cover this
task.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Anthony
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2. SMP Xen0 couldn't see all vcpus, no
matter dom0_max_vcpus=4 or 2.
>>>> "xm vcpu-list" can show the
other vcpus status are "P"
>>>
>>>xenLinux default config has CONFIG_NR_CPUS=4.
>>>Does increasing it up to 8 or 16 make
difference?
>>>
>>>Thanks.
>>>--
>>>yamahata
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel lists.xensource.com
http://list
s.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|