From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dulloor Subject: Re: [XEN][vNUMA][PATCH 7/9] Build NUMA HVM Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:07:35 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1BEA8649F0C00540AB2811D7922ECB6C9338B4D2@orsmsx507.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: George Dunlap Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org WIth the NUMA allocator, pod is simply disabled as of now. This debug statement seeped through when testing that. Will take care of it :) However, I did test PoD for any regressions. -dulloor On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:55 AM, George Dunlap wrote: > What's this line for: > >>+ =A0 =A0if (nr_pages > target_pages) >> =A0 =A0 { >>- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0PERROR("Could not allocate memory."); >>- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0goto error_out; >>+ =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0pod_mode =3D 1; >>+ =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0mem_flags |=3D XENMEMF_populate_on_demand; >>+ =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0IPRINTF("I SHOULDN'T BE HERE !!\n"); > > It's not clear what this patch does to the PoD logic... does it still > need some work, or should I try harder to grok it? =A0Have you tested it > in PoD mode? > > =A0-George >