WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ia64-devel

Re: [PATCH] allow vcpu to move between pcpus (was Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] c

To: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow vcpu to move between pcpus (was Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] credit sched on ia64)
From: Tristan Gingold <Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 10:34:33 +0200
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 01:30:45 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060703042220.GB10979%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200606220914.02813.Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx> <20060703042220.GB10979%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.5
Le Lundi 03 Juillet 2006 06:22, Isaku Yamahata a écrit :
> This patch allows vcpu to move between pcpus.
> I couldn't boot domU on credit scheduler without this patch.
> This patch is only for correctness. This patch isn't efficient.
2 comments:

The obvious question is why not using _dirty_cpumask; but the obvious reason 
is of course performance issues :-)  So I *definitly* agree with your patch.

The patch is not that inefficient: only vcpu migration is inefficent !

> Maybe a consideration on VHPT per pcpu is needed.
> - allocation of region id per domain.
>   Should rid region be allocated per vcpu?
Two issues:
* lack of rids as you noted
* linux assumes rid can be shared: if rid are allocated per vcpu, process 
migration can be expansive.

>   By this, it would be unnecessary to flush when vcpu movement.
>   But I think this isn't very preferable because the size of region id
>   given to vcpu would be too small.
>
> - Currently allocation of VHPT per physical cpus.
>   Allocate VHPT per vcpu like vt-i domain?
Vcpu migration is a big pro for per VHPT vcpu, but NUMA is a cons :-)
>   I think this is preferable, but some measuremeat should back this.

> - other?
One may ask wether or not vcpu migration is interesting wrt NUMA.  I think for 
NUMA machines, vcpu migration must go with memory migration.

Also, note that __cacheline_aligned_in_smp is defined as nothing on xen/ia64.
You'd better either not to use it or define it.

Tristan.

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

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