On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 12:32 +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> In order to make it easy to iterate over sched_unit elements of a
> domain build a single linked list and add an iterator for it.
>
How about a ',' between domain and build?

> For completeness add another iterator for_each_sched_unit_vcpu()
> which
> will iterate over all vcpus if a sched_unit (right now only one).
> This

"over all vcpus of a sched_unit" ?

> will be needed later for larger scheduling granularity (e.g. cores).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
>
One question:

> @@ -279,8 +279,16 @@ struct vcpu
>  struct sched_unit {
>      struct vcpu           *vcpu;
>      void                  *priv;      /* scheduler private data */
> +    struct sched_unit     *next_in_list;
>  };
>  
> +#define for_each_sched_unit(d,
> e)                                         \
> +    for ( (e) = (d)->sched_unit_list; (e) != NULL; (e) = (e)-
> >next_in_list )
> +
> +#define for_each_sched_unit_vcpu(i,
> v)                                    \
> +    for ( (v) = (i)->vcpu; (v) != NULL && (v)->sched_unit ==
> (i);         \
> +          (v) = (v)->next_in_list )
> +
>
So, here... sorry if it's me not seeing it, but why the 
(v)->sched_unit == (i) check is necessary?

Do we expect to put in the list of vcpus of a particular unit, vcpus
that are in another unit?

Regards
-- 
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D
http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Virtualization Software Engineer
SUSE Labs, SUSE https://www.suse.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<<This happens because _I_ choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)