On 3/18/19 1:11 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Instead of removing cpus temporarily from cpupools during
> suspend/resume only remove cpus finally which didn't come up when
> resuming.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>
Looks good overall -- one comment...
> @@ -774,10 +741,15 @@ static int cpu_callback(
> {
> case CPU_DOWN_FAILED:
> case CPU_ONLINE:
> - rc = cpupool_cpu_add(cpu);
> + if ( system_state <= SYS_STATE_active )
> + rc = cpupool_cpu_add(cpu);
> break;
> case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE:
> - rc = cpupool_cpu_remove(cpu);
> + if ( system_state <= SYS_STATE_active )
> + rc = cpupool_cpu_remove(cpu);
> + break;
> + case CPU_RESUME_FAILED:
> + cpupool_cpu_remove_forced(cpu);
> break;
> default:
It would be good to have some comments here just explaining this; maybe
just to the effect of, "Suspend/resume operations don't affect cpupool
placement".
With that:
Reviewed-by: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
