From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: [v7 PATCH 03/10] xen: derive NUMA node affinity from hard and soft CPU affinity Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:33:08 +0100 Message-ID: <53972534.8070908@eu.citrix.com> References: <20140610002959.16660.44334.stgit@Solace> <20140610004443.16660.61987.stgit@Solace> <53971BCF.1090608@eu.citrix.com> <1402413602.16827.37.camel@Solace> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1402413602.16827.37.camel@Solace> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Dario Faggioli Cc: keir@xen.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com, George.Dunlap@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, JBeulich@suse.com, Ian.Jackson@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/10/2014 04:20 PM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On mar, 2014-06-10 at 15:53 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: >> On 06/10/2014 01:44 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote: >>> if a domain's NUMA node-affinity (which is what controls >>> memory allocations) is provided by the user/toolstack, it >>> just is not touched. However, if the user does not say >>> anything, leaving it all to Xen, let's compute it in the >>> following way: >>> >>> 1. cpupool's cpus & hard-affinity & soft-affinity >>> 2. if (1) is empty: cpupool's cpus & hard-affinity >>> >>> This guarantees memory to be allocated from the narrowest >>> possible set of NUMA nodes, ad makes it relatively easy to >>> set up NUMA-aware scheduling on top of soft affinity. >>> >>> Note that such 'narrowest set' is guaranteed to be non-empty. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli >>> Reviewed-by: George Dunlap >>> Acked-by: Jan Beulich >>> --- >>> Chenges from v6: >>> * fixed a bug when a domain was being created inside a >>> cpupool; >> This definitely should have erased the Reviewed-by, as it implies I >> reviewed the bug fix. >> > Right! Sorry for that. I actually wanted to do it, but I just forgot to > before pressing enter on `stg email'! :-( > >> Also, just curious, did you rename these variables since the last series? >> >> Acked-by: George Dunlap >> > Thanks and sorry again. So, for v8, should I kill the Reviewed-by and > replace it with the Acked-by? Yes, I think so -- basically I haven't had time to do a thorough review of the cpupool stuff, but at a first glance it looks good. I can do so if needed. -George