Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/4] libxl: implement NUMA capabilities reporting

[Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1413 bytes --]

On gio, 2013-07-04 at 13:21 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> >On lun, 2013-07-01 at 16:47 -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> >> info --numa' says
> >> 
> >> total_memory           : 8190
> >> ...
> >> numa_info              :
> >> node:    memsize    memfree    distances
> >>     0:      8960       7116      10
> >> 
> >> Why is the node memsize > total_memory?
> >
> >Mmm... Interesting question. I really never paid attention to this...
> >Jan (or anyone else), is that something known and/or expected?
> >
> Is the difference not the amount that Xen hypervisor consumes?  It just has not been subtracted from the NUMA values. 
>
I thought about that too, and I'm not that has nothing to do with it.

However, in the rest of my message, I reported the results of some
investigation I did, and the relevant (and hopefully correct enough)
calculations... Have you seen that? What do you think about it?

Moreover, wherever the difference is coming from, what I'm asking is,
should we stick with this situation or take some kind of action?

Thanks and 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: 198 bytes --]

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

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