From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: postpone updating domains' node
 affinity when removing a CPU from a cpupool
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 16:04:36 +0000
Message-ID: <1426089874.21405.10.camel@citrix.com>
References: <20150309164901.11859.95044.stgit@Solace.station>
	<550058BB.7000102@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5585166940110603216=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <550058BB.7000102@eu.citrix.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>
Cc: "JGross@suse.com" <JGross@suse.com>, "keir.xen@gmail.com" <keir.xen@gmail.com>, "jtweaver@hawaii.edu" <jtweaver@hawaii.edu>, "JBeulich@suse.com" <JBeulich@suse.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

--===============5585166940110603216==
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-N1MavL9+n300xnHkZfI5"

--=-N1MavL9+n300xnHkZfI5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 15:01 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 03/09/2015 04:49 PM, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > 93be8285 ("update domU's node-affinity on the cpupool_unassign_cpu()
> > path")  does the right thing, but does it too early. In fact, it
> > is necessary to call domain_update_node_affinity() when a pCPU is
> > removed from a cpupool, but that must happen after the pCPU is
> > really gone from there.
> >=20
> > More specifically, it is important that the update happens not
> > before cpu_disable_scheduler() is called on that pCPU, to give
> > that function the chance to fixup the vCPU affinity of the
> > domains residing in the cpupool, if that is necessary.
>=20
> It looks like domain_update_node_affinity() is already called for each
> domain in the cpupool in cpu_disable_scheduler().  It doesn't look like
> there should be a need to call it twice.  Can we just remove the call to
> domain_update_node_affinity() in cpupool_unassign_cpu() and not add it ba=
ck?
>=20
Mmm.. true, actually.

I'll send a patch to that effect.

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

--=-N1MavL9+n300xnHkZfI5
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

iEYEABECAAYFAlUAZ5IACgkQk4XaBE3IOsRh8gCeIZ44b4ipfDgUT5uVzC9ItIpw
xCYAnjI6voDwKpaMJMgphzw3ZmSSTdnB
=EKQK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-N1MavL9+n300xnHkZfI5--


--===============5585166940110603216==
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

--===============5585166940110603216==--