On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 12:24:40PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: > Future IOThread setting patches would copy the code anyway, so create > and generalize the add the vcpu to a cgroup into its own API. > > Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jfer...@redhat.com> > --- > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 69 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > index 6132674..fa880b7 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > @@ -4635,9 +4635,49 @@ static void qemuProcessEventHandler(void *data, void > *opaque) > VIR_FREE(processEvent); > } > > -static int qemuDomainHotplugVcpus(virQEMUDriverPtr driver, > - virDomainObjPtr vm, > - unsigned int nvcpus) > +typedef int cgroupNewFunc(virCgroupPtr domain, > + int id, > + bool create, > + virCgroupPtr *group); > +
We have three virCgroupNew* functions that only differ by the parameters
of the virAsprintf call.
Would it make sense to turn them into one like this:
virCgroupNewThread(virCgroupThreadName name,
int id,
...)
which would take the name of the thread from the enum, instead of the
function name?
Jan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
