Hi Julien
> On 28 Jul 2022, at 9:50 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> Hi Rahul,
>
> On 28/07/2022 16:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> As you mentioned, if we don’t restrict the number of events channel for the
>> dom0 system will boot slower.
>> This is a good reason to restrict the number of event channel
Hi Rahul,
On 28/07/2022 16:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
As you mentioned, if we don’t restrict the number of events channel for the
dom0 system will boot slower.
This is a good reason to restrict the number of event channels for dom0.
Let me start that I am still fine if you want to push for a new
p
On 28.07.2022 17:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> On 26 Jul 2022, at 6:37 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On 21/07/2022 16:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>>> Ok. I will not add the warning. Just to confirm again is that okay If I add
>>> new command line option "max_event_channels” in
>>> next version for dom0 to re
Hi Julien
> On 26 Jul 2022, at 6:37 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 21/07/2022 16:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>
> Hi Rahul,
>
>>> On 21 Jul 2022, at 2:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21/07/2022 13:50, Rahul Singh wrote:
Hi Julien,
>>>
>>> Hi Rahul,
>>>
> On 20
On 21/07/2022 16:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Rahul,
On 21 Jul 2022, at 2:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
On 21/07/2022 13:50, Rahul Singh wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Rahul,
On 20 Jul 2022, at 12:16 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Rahul,
On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
On 13 Jul
Hi Julien,
> On 21 Jul 2022, at 2:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> On 21/07/2022 13:50, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>
> Hi Rahul,
>
>>> On 20 Jul 2022, at 12:16 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Rahul,
>>>
>>> On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Jul
On 21/07/2022 13:50, Rahul Singh wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Rahul,
On 20 Jul 2022, at 12:16 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Rahul,
On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julie
Hi Julien,
> On 20 Jul 2022, at 12:16 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> Hi Rahul,
>
> On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
>>> On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
>
On 20.07.2022 13:16, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
>>> On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
>> I can't
>> see why it would be wrong to have a mor
Hi Rahul,
On 20/07/2022 10:59, Rahul Singh wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
I can't
see why it would be wrong to have a more tight limit on static ports
than on traditional ("d
Hi ,
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 1:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
I can't
see why it would be wrong to have a more tight limit on static ports
than on traditional ("dynamic") ones. Even
On 13/07/2022 13:12, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
I can't
see why it would be wrong to have a more tight limit on static ports
than on traditional ("dynamic") ones. Even if only to make sure so
many dynamic ones are left.
This is similar to Xen forb
Hi,
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:31, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 13/07/2022 11:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.07.2022 12:18, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 13/07/2022 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
Hi Jan,
On 13/07/2022 11:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.07.2022 12:18, Julien Grall wrote:
On 13/07/2022 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict the
maximu
On 13.07.2022 12:18, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 13/07/2022 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict
>> the maximum number of static
>> port s
Hi,
On 13/07/2022 11:03, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 13 Jul 2022, at 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict the
maximum number of static
port sup
Hi Jan,
On 13/07/2022 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict the
maximum number of static
port supported in Xen. We can check the user-defined static
> On 13 Jul 2022, at 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
> For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict
> the maximum number of static
> port supported in Xen. We can
On 13.07.2022 11:35, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict the
maximum number of static
port supported in Xen. We can check the user-defined static port when we
parse the de
Hi,
On 13/07/2022 07:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
For the FIFO issue, we can introduce the new config option to restrict the
maximum number of static
port supported in Xen. We can check the user-defined static port when we parse
the device tree and if
a user-defined static port is greater than the m
On 12.07.2022 19:28, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 17:08, Rahul Singh wrote:
>>> On 22 Jun 2022, at 3:51 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 22/06/2022 15:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
event channel support for dom0less do
On 11/07/2022 17:08, Rahul Singh wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Rahul,
On 22 Jun 2022, at 3:51 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 22/06/2022 15:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
event channel support for dom0less domains requires allocating a
Hi Julien,
> On 22 Jun 2022, at 3:51 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 22/06/2022 15:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
>> event channel support for dom0less domains requires allocating a
>> specified port.
>> Modify the evtchn
On 22.06.2022 16:51, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 22/06/2022 15:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
>> event channel support for dom0less domains requires allocating a
>> specified port.
>>
>> Modify the evtchn_alloc_unbound() to accept the
Hi,
On 22/06/2022 15:37, Rahul Singh wrote:
evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
event channel support for dom0less domains requires allocating a
specified port.
Modify the evtchn_alloc_unbound() to accept the port number as an
argument and allocate the specif
evtchn_alloc_unbound() always allocates the next available port. Static
event channel support for dom0less domains requires allocating a
specified port.
Modify the evtchn_alloc_unbound() to accept the port number as an
argument and allocate the specified port if available. If the port
number argum
26 matches
Mail list logo
