Re: numa=on broken

[Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com>]

* Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> [2007-04-01 10:50]:
> On 1/4/07 14:46, "Ryan Harper" <ryanh@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> >> I don't think that auto-ballooning is a particularly sensible setting for
> >> serious use of Xen. I'd always advise to work out how much memory your dom0
> >> actually needs and make that a static allocation at boot time. But it is our
> >> out-of-the-box default: another thing that needs explicit changing (via
> >> dom0_mem= in this case).
> > 
> > Right.  It looks like then that it would make sense to leave numa off by
> > default leaving the admin to specify both numa=on and a sensible
> > dom0_mem in the absence of a mechanism for dom0 to hand back memory from
> > a specific node, or some page migration mechanism.
> 
> That's my thinking. I'll see about getting some numa=on testing mixed into
> our regression tests, however. There's no reason not to run some proportion
> of them with numa=on, although actually most of our test systems are not
> NUMA (a few are though).

Thanks.  I should have a patchset for exposing the topology and heap
information cooked up this week for post 3.0.5 consideration.

-- 
Ryan Harper
Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center
IBM Corp., Austin, Tx
(512) 838-9253   T/L: 678-9253
ryanh@us.ibm.com