vnuma toolstack extension request

vnuma toolstack extension request

[Elena Ufimtseva]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 197 bytes --]

Hello toolstack maintainers

I would like to request extension for vNUMA toolstack.
The patches are on the way (latest tomorrow) and it will need to go through
review  process as well.


-- 
Elena

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 297 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: vnuma toolstack extension request

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:30:58AM -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:
> Hello toolstack maintainers
> 
> I would like to request extension for vNUMA toolstack.
> The patches are on the way (latest tomorrow) and it will need to go through
> review  process as well.

Hey Elena,

Before you invest time in this, a couple of questions:

 - Dariof was interested in merging this with his auto NUMA placement code.
   That piece of code does not look simple and I think he volunteered
   to do it. However he has also been busy reviewing Xen RT patches so
   I figured he hasn't yet done that.

 - Since it would interact with auto NUMA placement and expose new
   logic in libxl we run in the problem of the 'stable' API that we
   MUST preserve. That is a worry - and will require scrutinity.

 - I think (and please correct me if I am wrong) that it would require
   at least two revisions to be posted.

 - What is the impact if the toolstack patches go in Xen 4.6?

Thank you.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Elena

> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: vnuma toolstack extension request

[Elena Ufimtseva]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1649 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <
konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:30:58AM -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:
> > Hello toolstack maintainers
> >
> > I would like to request extension for vNUMA toolstack.
> > The patches are on the way (latest tomorrow) and it will need to go
> through
> > review  process as well.
>
> Hey Elena,
>

Hi Konrad


> Before you invest time in this, a couple of questions:
>
>  - Dariof was interested in merging this with his auto NUMA placement code.
>    That piece of code does not look simple and I think he volunteered
>    to do it. However he has also been busy reviewing Xen RT patches so
>    I figured he hasn't yet done that.
>

Yes, Dario mentioned he will be working on this.

>
>  - Since it would interact with auto NUMA placement and expose new
>    logic in libxl we run in the problem of the 'stable' API that we
>    MUST preserve. That is a worry - and will require scrutinity.
>
>  - I think (and please correct me if I am wrong) that it would require
>    at least two revisions to be posted.
>
Yes, its a strong possibility.

>
>  - What is the impact if the toolstack patches go in Xen 4.6?



Maybe maintainers will have more info about this. I am only aware of that
vNUMA will not be supported by toolstack in 4.5, so some related work will
not be merged
as vNUMA aware ballooning and HVM support (not sure if the last one is
happening though).


> Thank you.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Elena
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>
>


-- 
Elena

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3015 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: vnuma toolstack extension request

[Dario Faggioli]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3383 bytes --]

On mer, 2014-09-24 at 11:24 -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:

> 
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:

>         Hey Elena,
> 
> 
> Hi Konrad
>
Hi Elena and Konrad,
 
>         Before you invest time in this, a couple of questions:
>         
>          - Dariof was interested in merging this with his auto NUMA
>         placement code.
>            That piece of code does not look simple and I think he
>         volunteered
>            to do it. 
>
Not a piece of cake, definitely, mostly because of the many possible
ways the two things (vNUMA topology and automatic placement) can
interact and influence each others.

>         However he has also been busy reviewing Xen RT patches so
>            I figured he hasn't yet done that.
>  
Exactly. I'm actually mostly done with it, but it needs a bit of
refining of a couple of rough edges, and for sure some testing, and,
once posted, integration with the other toolstack changes Elena has done
while addressing review comments, and then of course re-reviewing.

> Yes, Dario mentioned he will be working on this.
>         
And I was, but as Konrad guessed, reviewing and testing the RT
scheduling stuff ate some time.

Also, consider that I'm about to disappear for at least two weeks,
starting (most likely) from next Monday, for (good :-) ) family reasons.
That means I probably won't be able to review/help with any future
version of the series.

Of course I'm no maintainer, I know, so that is not a showstopper
per-se. I'm just saying I think I could have been of help, while I
probably won't. :-)

>          - Since it would interact with auto NUMA placement and expose
>         new
>            logic in libxl we run in the problem of the 'stable' API
>         that we
>            MUST preserve. That is a worry - and will require
>         scrutinity.
>         
Indeed.

>          - What is the impact if the toolstack patches go in Xen 4.6?
>
FWIW, my personal opinion is that we better actually defer this to 4.6.
 
> Maybe maintainers will have more info about this. I am only aware of
> that
> vNUMA will not be supported by toolstack in 4.5, so some related work
> will not be merged 
> as vNUMA aware ballooning and HVM support (not sure if the last one is
> happening though).
>
Yes, true, this is a rather basic building block of more general vNUMA
support. However, this also mean that, even if we merge it, we would
only have part of the picture in place for 4.5 anyway. I.e., we can work
on 4.6 to have all the vNUMA bits and pieces, and make a really big fuss
about that when releasing! :-)

This does not mean I would not have liked to have it there (given all
the effort that Elena, and recently Wei, put into it), but I guess this
is how software development work, isn't it? :-/

So, in summary, my take on this is: a lot of progress has been made,
which was not obvious, at least at some point. It's not yet ready, but
that only mean 4.6 will be a great release wrt vNUMA!! :-D

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: 181 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: vnuma toolstack extension request

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 06:09:24PM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On mer, 2014-09-24 at 11:24 -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> >         Hey Elena,
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Konrad
> >
> Hi Elena and Konrad,
>  
> >         Before you invest time in this, a couple of questions:
> >         
> >          - Dariof was interested in merging this with his auto NUMA
> >         placement code.
> >            That piece of code does not look simple and I think he
> >         volunteered
> >            to do it. 
> >
> Not a piece of cake, definitely, mostly because of the many possible
> ways the two things (vNUMA topology and automatic placement) can
> interact and influence each others.
> 
> >         However he has also been busy reviewing Xen RT patches so
> >            I figured he hasn't yet done that.
> >  
> Exactly. I'm actually mostly done with it, but it needs a bit of
> refining of a couple of rough edges, and for sure some testing, and,
> once posted, integration with the other toolstack changes Elena has done
> while addressing review comments, and then of course re-reviewing.
> 
> > Yes, Dario mentioned he will be working on this.
> >         
> And I was, but as Konrad guessed, reviewing and testing the RT
> scheduling stuff ate some time.
> 
> Also, consider that I'm about to disappear for at least two weeks,
> starting (most likely) from next Monday, for (good :-) ) family reasons.
> That means I probably won't be able to review/help with any future
> version of the series.
> 
> Of course I'm no maintainer, I know, so that is not a showstopper
> per-se. I'm just saying I think I could have been of help, while I
> probably won't. :-)
> 
> >          - Since it would interact with auto NUMA placement and expose
> >         new
> >            logic in libxl we run in the problem of the 'stable' API
> >         that we
> >            MUST preserve. That is a worry - and will require
> >         scrutinity.
> >         
> Indeed.
> 
> >          - What is the impact if the toolstack patches go in Xen 4.6?
> >
> FWIW, my personal opinion is that we better actually defer this to 4.6.
>  
> > Maybe maintainers will have more info about this. I am only aware of
> > that
> > vNUMA will not be supported by toolstack in 4.5, so some related work
> > will not be merged 
> > as vNUMA aware ballooning and HVM support (not sure if the last one is
> > happening though).
> >
> Yes, true, this is a rather basic building block of more general vNUMA
> support. However, this also mean that, even if we merge it, we would
> only have part of the picture in place for 4.5 anyway. I.e., we can work
> on 4.6 to have all the vNUMA bits and pieces, and make a really big fuss
> about that when releasing! :-)
> 
> This does not mean I would not have liked to have it there (given all
> the effort that Elena, and recently Wei, put into it), but I guess this
> is how software development work, isn't it? :-/
> 
> So, in summary, my take on this is: a lot of progress has been made,
> which was not obvious, at least at some point. It's not yet ready, but
> that only mean 4.6 will be a great release wrt vNUMA!! :-D


Yes! And it will give Elena some time to relax instead of hurridly have
to code and test all of this :-)

Elena, I am sorry - but based on the feedback I believe the best
course is to defer this to Xen 4.6.

> 
> 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)
> 

Re: vnuma toolstack extension request

[Elena Ufimtseva]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4110 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <
konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 06:09:24PM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > On mer, 2014-09-24 at 11:24 -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > > <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > >         Hey Elena,
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Konrad
> > >
> > Hi Elena and Konrad,
> >
> > >         Before you invest time in this, a couple of questions:
> > >
> > >          - Dariof was interested in merging this with his auto NUMA
> > >         placement code.
> > >            That piece of code does not look simple and I think he
> > >         volunteered
> > >            to do it.
> > >
> > Not a piece of cake, definitely, mostly because of the many possible
> > ways the two things (vNUMA topology and automatic placement) can
> > interact and influence each others.
> >
> > >         However he has also been busy reviewing Xen RT patches so
> > >            I figured he hasn't yet done that.
> > >
> > Exactly. I'm actually mostly done with it, but it needs a bit of
> > refining of a couple of rough edges, and for sure some testing, and,
> > once posted, integration with the other toolstack changes Elena has done
> > while addressing review comments, and then of course re-reviewing.
> >
> > > Yes, Dario mentioned he will be working on this.
> > >
> > And I was, but as Konrad guessed, reviewing and testing the RT
> > scheduling stuff ate some time.
> >
> > Also, consider that I'm about to disappear for at least two weeks,
> > starting (most likely) from next Monday, for (good :-) ) family reasons.
> > That means I probably won't be able to review/help with any future
> > version of the series.
> >
> > Of course I'm no maintainer, I know, so that is not a showstopper
> > per-se. I'm just saying I think I could have been of help, while I
> > probably won't. :-)
> >
> > >          - Since it would interact with auto NUMA placement and expose
> > >         new
> > >            logic in libxl we run in the problem of the 'stable' API
> > >         that we
> > >            MUST preserve. That is a worry - and will require
> > >         scrutinity.
> > >
> > Indeed.
> >
> > >          - What is the impact if the toolstack patches go in Xen 4.6?
> > >
> > FWIW, my personal opinion is that we better actually defer this to 4.6.
> >
> > > Maybe maintainers will have more info about this. I am only aware of
> > > that
> > > vNUMA will not be supported by toolstack in 4.5, so some related work
> > > will not be merged
> > > as vNUMA aware ballooning and HVM support (not sure if the last one is
> > > happening though).
> > >
> > Yes, true, this is a rather basic building block of more general vNUMA
> > support. However, this also mean that, even if we merge it, we would
> > only have part of the picture in place for 4.5 anyway. I.e., we can work
> > on 4.6 to have all the vNUMA bits and pieces, and make a really big fuss
> > about that when releasing! :-)
> >
> > This does not mean I would not have liked to have it there (given all
> > the effort that Elena, and recently Wei, put into it), but I guess this
> > is how software development work, isn't it? :-/
> >
> > So, in summary, my take on this is: a lot of progress has been made,
> > which was not obvious, at least at some point. It's not yet ready, but
> > that only mean 4.6 will be a great release wrt vNUMA!! :-D
>
>
> Yes! And it will give Elena some time to relax instead of hurridly have
> to code and test all of this :-)
>

Heh, I did code it, but some tests are not really happy )

>
> Elena, I am sorry - but based on the feedback I believe the best
> course is to defer this to Xen 4.6.
>

Well, that is good and bad at the same time :)

>
> >
> > 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)
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Elena

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5759 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel