From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andre Przywara Subject: Re: [vNUMA v2][PATCH 2/8] public interface Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 09:01:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4C591046.4070201@amd.com> References: <4C589051.2020806@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Dulloor Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Dulloor wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Keir Fraser wrote: >> On 03/08/2010 22:55, "Andre Przywara" wrote: >> >>>> As such, the purpose of vnode-to-mnode translation is for the enlightened >>>> guests to know where their underlying memory comes from, so that >>>> over-provisioning features >>>> like ballooning are given a chance to maintain this distribution. >>> I was afraid you were saying that ;-) I haven't thought about this in >>> detail, but maybe we can make an exception for Dom0 only, because this >>> is the most prominent and frequent user of ballooning. But I really >>> think that DomUs should not know about or deal with host NUMA nodes. >> So long as it gets renamed to 'node_id' in the info structure I'm okay with >> it. That doesn't preclude simply setting that field to 0...nr_vnodes-1 and >> doing translation in the hypervisor, but also leaves us a bit of >> flexibility. > Yes, I like this idea. Will do that. Ack, that sounds good. So we have virtual nodes, virtual physical nodes and machine nodes. Andre. -- Andre Przywara AMD-OSRC (Dresden) Tel: x29712