From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
To: Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: libxl/xl: run NUMA placement even when an hard-affinity is set
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:14:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180820101428.djudte4z2wye3cz3@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <153452538306.14879.2645077465028661264.stgit@Palanthas.fritz.box>
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 07:03:03PM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> Right now, if either an hard or soft-affinity are explicitly specified
> in a domain's config file, automatic NUMA placement is skipped. However,
> automatic NUMA placement affects only the soft-affinity of the domain
> which is being created.
>
> Therefore, it is ok to let it run if an hard-affinity is specified. The
> semantics will be that the best placement candidate would be found,
> respecting the specified hard-affinity, i.e., using only the nodes that
> contain the pcpus in the hard-affinity mask.
The reasoning sound plausible. I have some questions below.
>
> This is particularly helpful if global xl pinning masks are defined, as
> made possible by commit aa67b97ed34279c43 ("xl.conf: Add global affinity
> masks"). In fact, without this commit, defining a global affinity mask
> would also mean disabling automatic placement, but that does not
> necessarily have to be the case (especially in large systems).
>
> Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>
> ---
> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
> Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
> ---
> tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> tools/xl/xl_parse.c | 6 ++++--
> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
> index eb401cf1d6..e30e2dca9a 100644
> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,8 @@
>
> #include "_paths.h"
>
> +//#define DEBUG 1
> +
Stray changes here?
You can use NDEBUG instead.
> libxl_domain_type libxl__domain_type(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t domid)
> {
> libxl_ctx *ctx = libxl__gc_owner(gc);
> @@ -142,12 +144,13 @@ static int numa_place_domain(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t domid,
> {
> int found;
> libxl__numa_candidate candidate;
> - libxl_bitmap cpupool_nodemap;
> + libxl_bitmap cpumap, cpupool_nodemap, *map;
> libxl_cpupoolinfo cpupool_info;
> int i, cpupool, rc = 0;
> uint64_t memkb;
>
> libxl__numa_candidate_init(&candidate);
> + libxl_bitmap_init(&cpumap);
> libxl_bitmap_init(&cpupool_nodemap);
> libxl_cpupoolinfo_init(&cpupool_info);
>
> @@ -162,6 +165,38 @@ static int numa_place_domain(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t domid,
> rc = libxl_cpupool_info(CTX, &cpupool_info, cpupool);
> if (rc)
> goto out;
> + map = &cpupool_info.cpumap;
> +
> + /*
> + * If there's a well defined hard affinity mask (i.e., the same one for all
> + * the vcpus), we can try to run the placement considering only the pcpus
> + * within such mask.
> + */
> + if (info->num_vcpu_hard_affinity)
> + {
Placement of "{" is wrong.
> +#ifdef DEBUG
#ifndef NDEBUG ?
> + int j;
> +
> + for (j = 0; j < info->num_vcpu_hard_affinity; j++)
> + assert(libxl_bitmap_equal(&info->vcpu_hard_affinity[0],
> + &info->vcpu_hard_affinity[j], 0));
> +#endif /* DEBUG */
But why should the above be debug only? The assumption doesn't seem to
always hold.
> +
> + rc = libxl_bitmap_and(CTX, &cpumap, &info->vcpu_hard_affinity[0],
> + &cpupool_info.cpumap);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out;
> +
> + /*
> + * Hard affinity should _really_ contain cpus that are inside our
> + * cpupool. Anyway, if it does not, log a warning and only use the
> + * cpupool's cpus for placement.
> + */
> + if (!libxl_bitmap_is_empty(&cpumap))
> + map = &cpumap;
> + else
> + LOG(WARN, "Hard affinity completely outside of domain's cpupool?");
Should this be an error?
What is the expected interaction for hard affinity and cpupool?
Wei.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-20 10:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-17 17:03 [PATCH] tools: libxl/xl: run NUMA placement even when an hard-affinity is set Dario Faggioli
2018-08-20 10:14 ` Wei Liu [this message]
2018-08-20 14:22 ` Dario Faggioli
2018-08-21 10:25 ` Ian Jackson
2018-08-21 15:14 ` Dario Faggioli
2018-08-21 15:31 ` Ian Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180820101428.djudte4z2wye3cz3@citrix.com \
--to=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=dfaggioli@suse.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).