[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RESEND 05/12] xen: numa-sched: make space for per-vcpu node-affinity
- To: "Dario Faggioli" <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx>, "George Dunlap" <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:22:16 +0000
- Cc: MarcusGranado <Marcus.Granado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, JustinWeaver <jtweaver@xxxxxxxxxx>, IanCampbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, LiYechen <lccycc123@xxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, JuergenGross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, MattWilson <msw@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, DanielDe Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, KeirFraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, Elena Ufimtseva <ufimtseva@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:22:53 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
>>> On 06.11.13 at 17:12, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The question Dario has is this: given that we now have per-vcpu hard and
> soft scheduling affinity, how should we automatically construct the
> per-domain memory allocation affinity, if at all? Should we construct
> it from the "hard" scheduling affinities, or from the "soft" scheduling
> affinities?
>
> I said that I thought we should use the soft affinity; but I really
> meant the "effective soft affinity" -- i.e., the union of soft, hard,
> and cpupools.
Actually I think trying on the most narrow set first (soft) and then
widening (hard, anywhere) is indeed the most sensible approach
then.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
