From: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
To: Vijay Kilari <vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>,
Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
"prasun.kapoor" <prasun.kapoor@cavium.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: arm64: Approach for DT based NUMA and issues
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:30:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1480336212.3178.7.camel@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALicx6uug-L=r+iupTn7RfxJgPz6KHC2C75mtGbFyJS9=VRt2A@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2449 bytes --]
On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 16:32 +0530, Vijay Kilari wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Dario Faggioli
> <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > That makes perfect sense to me, and FWIW, is also what I'd do. In
> > fact,
> > the whole point of what I was saying was not to confuse Xen NUMA
> > support and Dom0 NUMA support; if we want to do both of them, the
> > latter right after the former, fine, but they're separate things
> > indeed.
> Yes, agreed. Whatever the existing Xen NUMA-Aware code is
> completely kept
> under x86, which can be used for arm as well. So needs cleanup and
> make common
> for both archs.
>
Sure.
> Regarding Dom0 NUMA-aware, in arm Dom0 is completely not NUMA-
> aware, not even
> to the extent supported in x86.
>
Well, Dom0 is ~0% NUMA aware on x86. But it's not important whose Dom0
is _less_ NUMA aware. What I (and also Julien, AFAICT) am talking about
is that we should start make Xen NUMA aware for ARM, before looking at
Dom0.
> > This means that, by default, Dom0 memory is indeed spread among
> > various
> > existing nodes. Eg., on my NUMA test box here at home, here's how
> > things are for Dom0:
>
> This default behaviour of spreading memory across existing nodes is
> better to some
> extent compared to ARM.. On ARM, All the allocation is based on
> allocator.
> All it assumes all the memory is on single node.
>
Again, I don't know much about ARM, but my point is this: look at the
differences between xen/include/asm-arm/numa.h and
xen/include/asm-x86/numa.h.
E.g., from the ARM one:
#define cpu_to_node(cpu) 0
This is what I'm saying we should deal with first.
> > dom0_nodes=x is a way to tell Xen to (try as hard as it can) to
> > only
> > allocate the memory for dom0 only from NUMA node x but, even if
> > more
> > than one node is specified, that does not include giving to him a
> > virtual NUMA topology, nor making it aware of the underline NUMA
> > topology of the host in any way.
> >
>
> AFAIK, dom0_nodes is implemented only in x86 not in arm.
>
Well --given, for instance, the example above-- of course it is! :-)
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 127 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-28 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-26 6:59 arm64: Approach for DT based NUMA and issues Vijay Kilari
2016-11-27 1:01 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-27 12:23 ` Julien Grall
2016-11-27 20:51 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-28 11:02 ` Vijay Kilari
2016-11-28 12:30 ` Dario Faggioli [this message]
2016-11-28 17:49 ` Julien Grall
2016-11-28 13:50 ` Andre Przywara
2016-11-28 15:05 ` Vijay Kilari
2016-11-28 17:48 ` Julien Grall
2016-11-28 18:59 ` Julien Grall
2016-12-16 7:39 ` Vijay Kilari
2016-12-16 9:40 ` Julien Grall
2016-12-16 10:18 ` Dario Faggioli
2017-03-02 12:39 ` Vijay Kilari
2017-03-02 12:52 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-02 14:10 ` Vijay Kilari
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1480336212.3178.7.camel@citrix.com \
--to=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=julien.grall@arm.com \
--cc=prasun.kapoor@cavium.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=vijay.kilari@gmail.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.