[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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


  • To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 10:45:11 +0100
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:46:18 -0800
  • 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=PJb/yHBsTL4Sj9RB7cO257ne48FCrkIHkN1GwKhn0jQmsv9dX+QX2JMo gg45mJzK4FttUOqjkEAl3lC/3sK+YAatPhEY7up/OSNKu8mt5OuERtWmu gtJrElIdVcCGLuRROAlJIizaDXFBlZAoEz8Dwy7swu0I+Ofj/qTeAt762 xX6tOb5DHXDTzpqEvkrMogqKrW3hIZ8i3gIRF3CLY14nEUNgz/Y4Huq3y XVgfAkxG2mHFxuNYmRfBodZEdOMbH;
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

On 12/08/10 15:12, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 13:41 +0000, Juergen Gross wrote:
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...

And hotplugged CPUs don't automatically go into Pool-0?

I just checked it: they ARE added to Pool-0.

This rises another problem: it would be nice to adjust the NUMA
splitting after a hot-plug of a cpu...
An "update" option to xl cpupool-numa-split would be appropriate,
I think. It should move cpus from Pool 0 to the correct node pools
and create new node pools if necessary.

I'll prepare another patch later...


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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.