From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [PATCH 09 of 10 v3] libxl: have NUMA placement deal with cpupools Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:42:12 +0200 Message-ID: <1341582132.15708.32.camel@Abyss> References: <885e2f385601d6617905.1341418688@Solace> <4FF6DD1B.60106@eu.citrix.com> <1341580217.15708.27.camel@Abyss> <4FF6E7B4.6070204@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2620468798733931560==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FF6E7B4.6070204@eu.citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: Andre Przywara , Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini , Juergen Gross , Ian Jackson , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Roger Pau Monne List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============2620468798733931560== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-+MvYPWNokWC8G/+lh/LP" --=-+MvYPWNokWC8G/+lh/LP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:27 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:=20 > > Maybe, if we're cool with patch 8, we can jut skip this for now, and > > I'll resubmit a separate patch (where I'll deal with duplicates) like > > later or on Monday? > Well, before discussing acking or nacking, I just wanted to establish=20 > that this is what the code did. =20 > Sure. > Why don't we do this: let's check in this version, so we can start=20 > getting the cpu placement stuff tested. Then if there's time, you can= =20 > post patches to do the filtering at the node generation stage rather=20 > than the filtering stage. Does that make sense? >=20 It does to me, and I also think it's important to start seeing how this deals with some more thorough (automated or not) testing. Especially considering that changing the generator (and this applies also to the max-VS-sort thing) ex-post won't imply any change in the algorithm, so the test results we get with this version will still be valid (at least conceptually :-D). Thanks and Regards, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-+MvYPWNokWC8G/+lh/LP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk/26zQACgkQk4XaBE3IOsTl9gCeNTgYwL21myPZ8RSnDrFllkbn KXIAoIrU+1ulIjVHtYIGmJ8sosvgh9wA =Gf9n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-+MvYPWNokWC8G/+lh/LP-- --===============2620468798733931560== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============2620468798733931560==--