Much nicer, thank you. I''ve applied it for 3.0.5. However, given the effort put in to labelling a domain at the very start of its lifetime, wouldn''t it be a good idea to leave that label attached until the domain is actually destroyed? This would correspond to putting the destructor call in domain_destroy() or, even better, complete_domain_destroy(). Bear in mind that a domain may still be accessible and have resources allocated to it even after domain_kill() finishes executing. So stripping its resource label at that point in time is a bit worrying. -- Keir On 24/4/07 17:17, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:> This patch restructures part of the ACM code in Xen. When a domain is > created, the function acm_domain_create() in domain_create() is called > that does what previously the pre- and post_domain_create functions were > doing. Similarly there''s a function acm_domain_destroy() in > domain_kill() that reverts changes to state when destroying a domain. > There''s no more separate initialization necessary for domain-0, but > domain_create takes one more parameter, the ssidref. It is usually > passed through the hypercall when a domain is created. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@us.ibm.com>_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Stefan Berger
2007-Apr-24 16:15 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [Xen] [ACM] Code restructuring
Keir Fraser <keir@xensource.com> wrote on 04/24/2007 11:55:51 AM:> Much nicer, thank you. I''ve applied it for 3.0.5. However, given theeffort> put in to labelling a domain at the very start of its lifetime, wouldn''tit> be a good idea to leave that label attached until the domain is actually > destroyed? This would correspond to putting the destructor call in > domain_destroy() or, even better, complete_domain_destroy(). Bear inmind> that a domain may still be accessible and have resources allocated to it > even after domain_kill() finishes executing. So stripping its resourcelabel> at that point in time is a bit worrying.Right. Can you move this one call into complete_domain_destroy()? Stefan> > -- Keir > > On 24/4/07 17:17, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > This patch restructures part of the ACM code in Xen. When a domain is > > created, the function acm_domain_create() in domain_create() is called > > that does what previously the pre- and post_domain_create functionswere> > doing. Similarly there''s a function acm_domain_destroy() in > > domain_kill() that reverts changes to state when destroying a domain. > > There''s no more separate initialization necessary for domain-0, but > > domain_create takes one more parameter, the ssidref. It is usually > > passed through the hypercall when a domain is created. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@us.ibm.com> >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
This patch restructures part of the ACM code in Xen. When a domain is created, the function acm_domain_create() in domain_create() is called that does what previously the pre- and post_domain_create functions were doing. Similarly there''s a function acm_domain_destroy() in domain_kill() that reverts changes to state when destroying a domain. There''s no more separate initialization necessary for domain-0, but domain_create takes one more parameter, the ssidref. It is usually passed through the hypercall when a domain is created. Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@us.ibm.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 24/4/07 17:15, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:>> > Much nicer, thank you. I''ve applied it for 3.0.5. However, given the effort >> > put in to labelling a domain at the very start of its lifetime, wouldn''t it >> > be a good idea to leave that label attached until the domain is actually >> > destroyed? This would correspond to putting the destructor call in >> > domain_destroy() or, even better, complete_domain_destroy(). Bear in mind >> > that a domain may still be accessible and have resources allocated to it >> > even after domain_kill() finishes executing. So stripping its resource >> label >> > at that point in time is a bit worrying. > > Right. Can you move this one call into complete_domain_destroy()?Will do. K. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel