On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 04:55:43PM +0400, aburluka wrote: > >Ok, then I think you should find the lack of this API is non-fatal > >in Icehouse / Juno now. > You're perfectly right, this error is non-fatal anymore. > >With the full machine virt does Parallels have a separate > >process or thread for each vCPU, and if so can we identify > >the PIDs for the vCPUs to let us do proper pCPU<->vCPU > >mapping & reporting. > Every vCPU uses its own thread. A proper mapping pCPU<->vCPU is not > available at the moment. Due to distributed architecture of our product, > implementation of this feature may take some efforts. Is it really > necessary to have this mapping? No, it isn't mandatory - I'm just trying to understand what your HV is capable of to help me review the patch. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list