From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Przywara?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Include cpupool example in install Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:28:11 +0100 Message-ID: <4D59C89B.6060207@amd.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: George Dunlap Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Am 14.02.2011 16:59, schrieb George Dunlap: > xl cpupool-create at the moment requires a config file. Make > sure to include the example config file in the install. Good point. Btw: When I did some experiments with cpupools, I couldn't create the cpupool config file on the fly and pipe it to the xl cpupool-create command, as it: a) explicitly checks for a regular file to be named (and doesn't handle '-' or can cope with /dev/stdin) b) stats the file to learn the file size (requiring this to be a seekable file, that's why check a) These are restrictions which apply to guest config files, too, as they use the same functionality. Is this just a limit in the implementation or is the requirement for a regular on-disk file there for a reason? I could easily create a patch to do away with these restrictions (after the release), are there any arguments against this? Regards, Andre. -- Andre Przywara AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany