From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pasi =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4rkk=E4inen?= Subject: Re: Xen CPU limit? Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:26:24 +0300 Message-ID: <20100330092624.GA1878@reaktio.net> References: <4B991586.30602@cancer.org.uk> <20100329154901.GE1878@reaktio.net> <4BB1C174.6030901@cancer.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BB1C174.6030901@cancer.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Martin Lukasik Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:16:36AM +0100, Martin Lukasik wrote: > Pasi K=E4rkk=E4inen wrote: >> I think the number of virtual cpus (vcpus) per guest is (was) 32, >> and now in Xen 4.0.0 you can have up to 64 vcpus per guest. >> >> The max number of physical cpus is 128 or so.. >> =20 > > When I said "CPUs" I meant the number of physical CPUs (or strictly =20 > speaking: cores) visible by Dom0. > I thought I got my RPM from RedHat's repo, but there is a possibility =20 > that I'm wrong here... and I thought that Xen won't support more than 3= 2 =20 > cores. > I'm not really after setting up 48 cores for one virtual machine, just = =20 > wanted to be able to have all 48 visible in Dom0 (and then have up to 1= 6 =20 > per VM). > > Thanks for the answers; interesting read. > Why do you need to have all the cores visible to dom0?=20 It's usually enough to have a couple of cores for dom0,=20 and the rest free/available in Xen hypervisor for other guests. -- Pasi