On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 05:40:17PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
This is a refactoring of the XM driver. Previously we would store the virConfPtr objects as our master 'in memory' representation of inactive domains. This switch it over to using virDomainDefPtr objects instead. The code for reading/writing the config files is unchanged at this time.
[...]
@@ -1291,9 +1217,10 @@ int xenXMDomainPinVcpu(virDomainPtr doma xenXMConfCachePtr entry; virBuffer mapbuf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER; char *mapstr = NULL; - char *ranges = NULL; int i, j, n, comma = 0; int ret = -1; + char *cpuset = NULL; + int maxcpu = 4096;
hum, we use MAX_VIRT_CPUS at places
+++ b/tests/xmconfigdata/test-fullvirt-new-cdrom.xml Mon Jul 07 10:11:30 2008 -0400 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ <domain type='xen'> <name>XenGuest2</name> <uuid>c7a5fdb2-cdaf-9455-926a-d65c16db1809</uuid> + <memory>592896</memory> + <currentMemory>403456</currentMemory> + <vcpu>1</vcpu> <os> - <type>hvm</type> + <type arch='i686' machine='xenfv'>hvm</type>
I'm just a bit surprized by that addition, is that derived from the features set ? I don't see why the arch can't be x86-64 for example just based on the tests/xmconfigdata/test-fullvirt-new-cdrom.cfg config data.
+++ b/tests/xmconfigdata/test-paravirt-old-pvfb.xml Mon Jul 07 10:11:30 2008 -0400 [..] <devices> + <emulator>/usr/lib/xen/bin/qemu-dm</emulator>
So we are adding the emulator here, I guess nobody is gonna change that A couple of surprises in the tests, but the replacement looks safe +1 Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/