From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated
 from
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:38:23 +0000
Message-ID: <54F0734F.4020802@linaro.org>
References: <54EF315902000078000640FF@mail.emea.novell.com>	<54EF33A60200007800064144@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1425043639.10194.67.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@linaro.org>) id 1YRL80-00026v-9Q
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:38:52 +0000
Received: by wggz12 with SMTP id z12so20560861wgg.2
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Fri, 27 Feb 2015 05:38:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1425043639.10194.67.camel@citrix.com>
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: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>, "JBeulich@suse.com" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Dario,

On 27/02/15 13:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 13:54 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
> Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> 
> One question (a genuine one, i.e., I'm really not sure what I'm saying
> is correct).
> 
> After this series, vcpu_to_node() (defined in xen/include/xen/numa.h) is
> left with only one use, in xen/arch/arm/domain.c, besides of course
> being used to implement domain_to_node() (still in
> xen/include/xen/numa.h).
> 
> So, provided ARM people (and I'm Cc-ing them) can get rid of that, can
> that macro be removed all together, and domain_to_node(d) be defined
> after d->node_affinity... something like:
> 
>  #define domain_to_node(d) \
>    ( nodes_equal(d->node_affinity, NODE_MASK_ALL) \
>      ? NUMA_NO_NODE : first_node(d->node_affinity) ) 
> 
> I'm asking because I really don't like vcpu_to_node(). And I'm not
> talking about how it is implemented (there probably are not much
> alternatives), I'm saying I don't think it should exist, and I really
> would see value in killing it. :-)
> 
> Thoughts?

Given the changes made by Jan on x86, I think we could replace
vcpu_to_node by MEMF_no_owner.

FWIW, we don't have any NUMA support on ARM currently.

Regards,


-- 
Julien Grall