From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated from Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:00:21 +0000 Message-ID: <1425045618.10194.81.camel@citrix.com> References: <54EF315902000078000640FF@mail.emea.novell.com> <54EF33A60200007800064144@mail.emea.novell.com> <1425043639.10194.67.camel@citrix.com> <1425044785.14641.202.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7170789486202635131==" Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YRLSr-0007Ck-IC for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:00:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1425044785.14641.202.camel@citrix.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" , Andrew Cooper , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , "JBeulich@suse.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============7170789486202635131== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-YOfzIDoT4xbQHCG9/7dX" --=-YOfzIDoT4xbQHCG9/7dX Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:46 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:27 +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > After this series, vcpu_to_node() (defined in xen/include/xen/numa.h) i= s > > left with only one use, in xen/arch/arm/domain.c, besides of course > > being used to implement domain_to_node() (still in > > xen/include/xen/numa.h). > >=20 > > So, provided ARM people (and I'm Cc-ing them) can get rid of that, >=20 > Happy to do so if you have advise on what to replace it with, just 0? >=20 As Julien says, with the MEMF_no_owner feature Jan is introducing in the series. > We don't do NUMA yet on ARM so that would be fine, but eventually we'd > want the vcpu stack to be allocated in some sort of "sensible relative > to vcpu affinity" location... >=20 Yes, and Jan's MEMF_no_owner, if it works on your arch too, as it seems it could, will provide exactly that. Regards, Dario --=-YOfzIDoT4xbQHCG9/7dX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEABECAAYFAlTweHIACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQIhgCgmwvU63brkdtviM+riKpdUOIH RBsAoJRqM/SfOg1rBBJSlR44MkK0pAK5 =8WUe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-YOfzIDoT4xbQHCG9/7dX-- --===============7170789486202635131== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============7170789486202635131==--