Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4 of 4] Support new xl command cpupool-nu

To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4 of 4] Support new xl command cpupool-numa-split
From:	Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 08 Dec 2010 14:41:24 +0100
Cc:	"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date:	Wed, 08 Dec 2010 05:45:36 -0800
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ts.fujitsu.com; i=juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; q=dns/txt; s=s1536b; t=1291815686; x=1323351686; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; z=Message-ID:=20<4CFF8B04.8080305@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>\|Date:=20 Wed,=2008=20Dec=202010=2014:41:24=20+0100\|From:=20Juergen =20Gross=20<juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>\|MIME-Version: =201.0\|To:=20Ian=20Campbell=20<Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >\|CC:=20"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"=20<xen-devel@list s.xensource.com>\|Subject:=20Re:=20[Xen-devel]=20[PATCH=20 4=20of=204]=20Support=20new=20xl=20command=20cpupool-numa -split\|References:=20<f31333fe3b3553c90419.1290755427@mer ano1.osd.mch.fsc.net>=09=20<1291806978.13966.4529.camel@z akaz.uk.xensource.com>=09=20<4CFF7812.4050506@xxxxxxxxxxx com>=09=20<1291813922.13966.4553.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .com>=09=20<4CFF8569.4010104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>=20<129181548 4.13966.4555.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>\|In-Reply-To: =20<1291815484.13966.4555.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> \|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit; bh=S0c92a9PKvml3U4UESZJJOZBf66BCSxfZSRKkMFvbwk=; b=KsAoKz25psFFSKWE7s1iOu6wTuB+1vinfnZ5CzB2zY/l7q+D1jtaNqFA yru+Heqe/MyVYmKeYaH7G9XGZPcBiBnTr2kIGWzSiOmJ06lybosAo8MTg jKRG/xmiDWjziUlUGDAabhGpS7NNJTUo0E4iSGtiOrBbcoKbv24EGf7sy FmD4abXffEXwnk9CAbmMEuEkjc9FABhyZx0w+F0qVpkg1UA8SmBsJudQu 2nZ0EzvRYjMcUfQzXjtb7meXDy0mY;
Domainkey-signature:	s=s1536a; d=ts.fujitsu.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-SBRSScore:X-IronPort-AV:Received:X-IronPort-AV: Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization: User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ekbwlYE280WwBb6QXXoIivsuFitu355bNdbBsf6f2pQWDlVW5/MpsKNq tFZCw6hd1qmvSDM/HH0PK9tEJGswK1F9NgXmwZXbUadX2AJgVruKv5b6l Af3dzXOd4GtDZ8UJMVlMvUy62+emj/j5yVdAUpm76iTsNvqif27wFQfVg CntoNvq9NxH9ottlvtofBVWNjge2qO8VsprgHH+5bcMKAbzG4O+f99nlU w8GfJzEDwGouYX6gQKG7H/294+yF7;
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<1291815484.13966.4555.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization:	Fujitsu Technology Solutions
References:	<f31333fe3b3553c90419.1290755427@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1291806978.13966.4529.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4CFF7812.4050506@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1291813922.13966.4553.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4CFF8569.4010104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1291815484.13966.4555.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101030 Iceowl/1.0b1 Icedove/3.0.10

On 12/08/10 14:38, Ian Campbell wrote:

On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 13:17 +0000, Juergen Gross wrote:

On 12/08/10 14:12, Ian Campbell wrote:

On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 12:20 +0000, Juergen Gross wrote:

On 12/08/10 12:16, Ian Campbell wrote:

Can this loop be merged with the preceding loop, with the body being the
else case of the if?


No. I have to add new cpus first to avoid a cpupool without cpus in between.


ok.

I was thinking that because this function only gets here if there is a
single pool that all CPUs must be in that pool -- but that's not
actually true is it? Even if that were the common case there's nothing
to enforce that.


Perhaps I should add a comment to avoid a problem later...


That would certainly help.

The alternative would be to bail out if all cpus are not associated with
Pool-0, not just when there are>  1 pools. That would be consistent with
the function only acting on the default configuration.


I suspect NUMA systems are subject to cpu hot plug...

I'd prefer the way I've done it before. It isn't too complex and more
flexible.


Juergen

--
Juergen Gross                 Principal Developer Operating Systems
TSP ES&S SWE OS6                       Telephone: +49 (0) 89 3222 2967
Fujitsu Technology Solutions              e-mail: juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Domagkstr. 28                           Internet: ts.fujitsu.com
D-80807 Muenchen                 Company details: ts.fujitsu.com/imprint.html

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4 of 4] Support new xl command cpupool-numa-split