Re: [PATCH for 4.7] doc: document that Domain-0 can't be migrated across cpupools

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>]

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:53:30AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 09/05/16 10:36, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 09/05/2016 09:29, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >> Domain-0 is always member of Pool-0 (or, to be precise: of the cpuppol
> >> with cpupool-id 0). Document this in the xl man page.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
> > 
> > Out of interest, why?
> > 
> > Is this a limitation of the current implementation, or something which
> > couldn't be made to work?
> > 
> > Given that it is all just vcpus and linked lists in the end, I can't see
> > why this should necessarily be the case.
> 
> Main reason was to keep cpu hotplugging simple. New cpus are always
> added to Pool-0 and should be available to dom0 immediately without
> having to move them to another cpupool.
> 
> It could be changed, of course. But I don't see any advantage in
> allowing to move dom0 to another cpupool, while the code would be
> more complicated.
> 
> 

I think this patch is valid in that it documents the current situation.
Whether migration of Dom0 should be supported or not is a separate
topic.

Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Release-acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>

I've queued this up for committing.

Wei.

> Juergen
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel