From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Deegan Subject: Re: [Hackathon minutes] PV frontends/backends and NUMA machines Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:24:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20130521102409.GH9626@ocelot.phlegethon.org> References: <20130521083251.GD9626@ocelot.phlegethon.org> <20130521092003.GE9626@ocelot.phlegethon.org> <519B4241.2040006@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <519B4241.2040006@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: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org At 10:45 +0100 on 21 May (1369133137), George Dunlap wrote: > What we would want for a comparable domU -- a domU that was NUMA-aware > -- was to have the pfn layout in batches across the nodes to which it > will be pinned. E.g., if a domU has its NUMA affinity set to nodes 2-3, > then you'd want the first half of the pfns to come from node 2, the > second half from node 3. > > In both cases, the domain builder will need to call the allocator with > specific numa nodes for specific regions of the PFN space. Ah, so that logic lives in the tools for domU? I was misremembering. Anyway, I think I'm convinced that this is a reasonable thing to do the dom0 building code. :) Tim.