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 14:11:54 +0000 Message-ID: <1425046312.10194.88.camel@citrix.com> References: <54EF315902000078000640FF@mail.emea.novell.com> <54EF33A60200007800064144@mail.emea.novell.com> <1425043639.10194.67.camel@citrix.com> <54F080F002000078000649C9@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8826456083707001029==" Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YRLe4-0001Tt-08 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:12:00 +0000 In-Reply-To: <54F080F002000078000649C9@mail.emea.novell.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: "JBeulich@suse.com" Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" , Ian Campbell , Andrew Cooper , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============8826456083707001029== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-UAF8TUqDKuE6Q4g6pYBs" --=-UAF8TUqDKuE6Q4g6pYBs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:36 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 27.02.15 at 14:27, wrote: > > I'm asking because I really don't like vcpu_to_node(). And I'm not > > talking about how it is implemented (there probably are not much > > alternatives), I'm saying I don't think it should exist, and I really > > would see value in killing it. :-) >=20 > I'm all for killing it. In fact I'd also like to see domain_to_node() > go away, as it's similarly bogus (no matter of the proposed > changed implementation) - neither a vCPU nor a domain have > a "focus" node or some such (some may happen to if their node > mask has just a single set bit, but that's nothing code should > depend on).=20 > I totally agree. I didn't go as far as far as suggesting that because, if my grep-ing is not failing, it's still in use in two more places, even with your series applied. But yes, we really should make it possible to remove it too. > (And btw, at the very least first_node() in your > proposal should become any_node().) >=20 Except, there is no such function. But again, I agree, and if we get to the point where we can kill vcpu_to_node() but need to keep domain_to_node, we can of course implement it. :-) Regards, Dario --=-UAF8TUqDKuE6Q4g6pYBs 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 iEYEABECAAYFAlTweygACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQcLACbBaxbPQ+jSvVMpHT1ADNAWwZK jEYAnjSndifSZb/5s1NMI/Crlaos4LkC =mcdf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-UAF8TUqDKuE6Q4g6pYBs-- --===============8826456083707001029== 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 --===============8826456083707001029==--