From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] xen: sched: add .init_pdata hook to the scheduler interface Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:43:59 +0200 Message-ID: <560CE43F.3030809@suse.com> References: <20150929164726.17589.96920.stgit@Solace.station> <20150929165556.17589.62924.stgit@Solace.station> <560CC2EC.6030801@suse.com> <1443681197.3276.163.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhYX7-0005bK-IW for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:44:05 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1443681197.3276.163.camel@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Dario Faggioli , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Cc: George Dunlap List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/01/2015 08:33 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 07:21 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 09/29/2015 06:55 PM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > >>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c >>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c >>> @@ -1407,6 +1407,9 @@ static int cpu_schedule_callback( >>> >>> switch ( action ) >>> { >>> + case CPU_STARTING: >>> + SCHED_OP(&ops, init_pdata, cpu); >>> + break; >>> case CPU_UP_PREPARE: >>> rc = cpu_schedule_up(cpu); >>> break; >>> @@ -1484,6 +1487,7 @@ void __init scheduler_init(void) >>> if ( ops.alloc_pdata && >>> !(this_cpu(schedule_data).sched_priv = >>> ops.alloc_pdata(&ops, 0)) ) >>> BUG(); >>> + SCHED_OP(&ops, init_pdata, 0); >> >> You can't call this without having it set in all schedulers. >> >> I guess using the init_pdata hook has to be introduced after or in >> patch 5. >> > But, if it is not set, it is NULL, in which case, SCHED_OP does the > trick for me, doesn't it? > > #define SCHED_OP(opsptr, fn, ...) \ > (( (opsptr)->fn != NULL ) ? (opsptr)->fn(opsptr, ##__VA_ARGS__ ) \ > : (typeof((opsptr)->fn(opsptr, ##__VA_ARGS__)))0 ) Aah, yes, of course. Sorry for the noise. Juergen