On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:27:52PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
>
> >I would expect xc_domain_getinfolist() to just be an extended version
> >of xc_domain_getinfo() but filling-up a range of xc_dominfo_t. However
> >the declaration in xenctrl.h is 
> >
> > int xc_domain_getinfolist(int xc_handle,
> > uint32_t first_domain,
> > unsigned int max_domains,
> > xc_domaininfo_t *info);
> >
> >i.e. a different info pointer type than
> >
> > int xc_domain_getinfo(int xc_handle,
> > uint32_t first_domid,
> > unsigned int max_doms,
> > xc_dominfo_t *info);
> >
> >is that a typo ? xc_domaininfo_t is defined as dom0_getdomaininfo_t
> >which is a distinct type from xc_dominfo_t, with slightly different 
> >characteristics. Any reason for that disparity in the type returned
> >between those two functions ?
> > 
> >
> xc_domain_getinfolist is a batched interface to xc_domain_getinfo from 
> the hypervisor perspective. That is, getinfolist will only make a 
> single hypercall whereas getinfo will make up to max_doms hypercalls.
>
> getinfo massages the returned data into a more python friendly structure 
> (xc_dominfo_t) whereas getinfolist returns the raw results from the 
> hypercall (which is just typedef'd to xc_domaininfo_t.
>
> The argument for getinfolist was performance. Applications that require 
> as low-overhead as possible polling info polling mechanism can use 
> getinfolist.
 Okay, thanks !
Daniel
-- 
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel