This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xend: Add multiple cpumasks support

To: "Ryan Harper" <ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xend: Add multiple cpumasks support
From: "Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 23:03:49 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:04:17 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Aca/1RTv1+Ico0lzQFeLwvzPEhBJtgAFkL+g
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xend: Add multiple cpumasks support
> Are you interested in the multi cpumask approach?  

Yes: it certainly doesn't hurt to have that flexibility. 

> If so any thoughts on how
> you'd like to see multiple cpumasks in the config file?

Either Keir's cpu[X] = "Y" approach or my cpu = [ "A","B","C" ] approach
seem workable.

Keir's approach is rather ill defined if someone tries using both cpu=
and cpu[X]= in the same config file, but I don't see that as a big
problem.  Take your pick :-)

BTW: does the right thing happen in the face of vcpu hot plugging? i.e.
if I unplug a vcpu and put it back in do I keep the old mask? If I add
vcpus what mask do they get?

We should probably add a 'vcpu-pin' variant that enables the mask to be
set for all vcpus. Perhaps '-1' for the vcpu number? Or should we add

[secondly, what do you think about implicitly defaulting the mask to all
1's if the first item in a cpu mask is an exclusion? e.g. ^1] 


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>