From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 01/12] xen: numa-sched: leave node-affinity alone if not in "auto" mode
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 08:35:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CEA798C5.64CC8%keir.xen@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5281F0B50200007800102364@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On 12/11/2013 08:11, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> Hi Keir,
>
> below the one remaining patch mentioned yesterday.
>
> Jan
>
>>>> On 05.11.13 at 15:34, Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
>> If the domain's NUMA node-affinity is being specified by the
>> user/toolstack (instead of being automatically computed by Xen),
>> we really should stick to that. This means domain_update_node_affinity()
>> is wrong when it filters out some stuff from there even in "!auto"
>> mode.
>>
>> This commit fixes that. Of course, this does not mean node-affinity
>> is always honoured (e.g., a vcpu won't run on a pcpu of a different
>> cpupool) but the necessary logic for taking into account all the
>> possible situations lives in the scheduler code, where it belongs.
>>
>> What could happen without this change is that, under certain
>> circumstances, the node-affinity of a domain may change when the
>> user modifies the vcpu-affinity of the domain's vcpus. This, even
>> if probably not a real bug, is at least something the user does
>> not expect, so let's avoid it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
>> Reviewed-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
>> ---
>> This has been submitted already as a single patch on its own.
>> Since this series needs the change done here, just include it
>> in here, instead of pinging the original submission and deferring
>> posting this series.
>> ---
>> xen/common/domain.c | 28 +++++++++-------------------
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/common/domain.c b/xen/common/domain.c
>> index 5999779..af31ab4 100644
>> --- a/xen/common/domain.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/domain.c
>> @@ -352,7 +352,6 @@ void domain_update_node_affinity(struct domain *d)
>> cpumask_var_t cpumask;
>> cpumask_var_t online_affinity;
>> const cpumask_t *online;
>> - nodemask_t nodemask = NODE_MASK_NONE;
>> struct vcpu *v;
>> unsigned int node;
>>
>> @@ -374,28 +373,19 @@ void domain_update_node_affinity(struct domain *d)
>> cpumask_or(cpumask, cpumask, online_affinity);
>> }
>>
>> + /*
>> + * If d->auto_node_affinity is true, the domain's node-affinity mask
>> + * (d->node_affinity) is automaically computed from all the domain's
>> + * vcpus' vcpu-affinity masks (the union of which we have just built
>> + * above in cpumask). OTOH, if d->auto_node_affinity is false, we
>> + * must leave the node-affinity of the domain alone.
>> + */
>> if ( d->auto_node_affinity )
>> {
>> - /* Node-affinity is automaically computed from all vcpu-affinities
>> */
>> + nodes_clear(d->node_affinity);
>> for_each_online_node ( node )
>> if ( cpumask_intersects(&node_to_cpumask(node), cpumask) )
>> - node_set(node, nodemask);
>> -
>> - d->node_affinity = nodemask;
>> - }
>> - else
>> - {
>> - /* Node-affinity is provided by someone else, just filter out cpus
>> - * that are either offline or not in the affinity of any vcpus. */
>> - nodemask = d->node_affinity;
>> - for_each_node_mask ( node, d->node_affinity )
>> - if ( !cpumask_intersects(&node_to_cpumask(node), cpumask) )
>> - node_clear(node, nodemask);//d->node_affinity);
>> -
>> - /* Avoid loosing track of node-affinity because of a bad
>> - * vcpu-affinity has been specified. */
>> - if ( !nodes_empty(nodemask) )
>> - d->node_affinity = nodemask;
>> + node_set(node, d->node_affinity);
>> }
>>
>> sched_set_node_affinity(d, &d->node_affinity);
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-12 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-12 8:11 Fwd: [PATCH RESEND 01/12] xen: numa-sched: leave node-affinity alone if not in "auto" mode Jan Beulich
2013-11-12 8:35 ` Keir Fraser [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-11-05 14:33 [PATCH RESEND 00/12] Implement per-vcpu NUMA node-affinity for credit1 Dario Faggioli
2013-11-05 14:34 ` [PATCH RESEND 01/12] xen: numa-sched: leave node-affinity alone if not in "auto" mode Dario Faggioli
2013-11-05 14:43 ` George Dunlap
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=CEA798C5.64CC8%keir.xen@gmail.com \
--to=keir.xen@gmail.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.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).