From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] xl: get rid of the SEDF scheduler
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:42:47 +0100
Message-ID: <1435934567.9447.146.camel@citrix.com>
References: <20150703101558.5144.46511.stgit@Solace.station>
	<20150703102515.5144.98881.stgit@Solace.station>
	<1435933563.9447.131.camel@citrix.com>
	<1435934171.14347.79.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=6194caab5=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZB2B2-0003mc-I8
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 03 Jul 2015 14:42:52 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1435934171.14347.79.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 16:36 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 15:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 12:25 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > > -=item B<period=NANOSECONDS>
> > > -=item B<slice=NANOSECONDS>
> > > -=item B<latency=N>
> > > -=item B<extratime=BOOLEAN>
> > 
> > Do these removals imply there are some redundant fields in
> > libxl_domain_sched_params now? 
> >
> Yes, indeed.
> 
> > If so 
> > shall we tag them with a comment or something? 
> >
> That's another good point, I certainly can do that too.

Please.

> 
> > (We could do IDL code to
> > ifdef them for older LIBXL_API_VERSION only. but, faff.)
> > 
> Well, ideally, yes, but I'm not sure it is worth...

Indeed, too much faff.

> 
> > This patch itself:
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> > 
> Thanks,
> Dario
>