On 03/16/2016 10:25 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote:
+ if ( curr_on_cpu(vc->processor) == vc &&
>+ ( !list_empty(runq) ) )
>
So, this is because, since we don't keep the idle vcpus in the
runqueues, we need to catch the case where v is running, but no other
vcpu is waiting on the runqueue in runnable state, is this right?
In any case, parentheses around the second part of the && seems
pointless.
Yes. If there is no vcpu waiting on the run queue then there is no need
to compare deadlines and tickle.
Tianyang
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
