On mer, 2013-03-06 at 10:49 +0000, butian huang wrote:
> hello,
> 
Hi,

> I am using your patch about "[Xen-devel] [PATCH 00 of 10 [RFC]] Automatically place guest on host's NUMA nodes with xl",
> but I meet with a problem,that is, using the three NUMA placement policies, and putting the VM on the selected numa node;
>
Mmm... Can I ask "why" ?

And the reason why I'm asking is, that patch is the very first RFC of a
work that has been refined and resubmitted many times, and finally
checked-in the official Xen development repository, in time for the 4.2
release.

The above to say that, if you install and use Xen 4.2 (and, of course,
also if you clone, build and use the latest development branch) you'll
get a much better engineered, debugged and tested version of the
automatic placement feature.

So, is there a particular reason why you're sticking to that very first
and very old version of the patchset, instead of using the latest or,
much better, the official releases of Xen that incorporate  it?

> Actually,using the command  "xl info -n",the VM's memory is not placed the selected numa node,but it is placed averagly 
> on the four numa nodes.
> For example,the VM's memory is 2G,each node occupies 512m memory,why??? 
>
That is the old default behaviour, if no pinning and no automatic
placement happens. I remember having tested that old RFC before
submitting it, but I'm not in a position of figuring out the details of
what is going on anymore, since we well moved on from that stage.

If you could move on yourself to something more, well, "current", that
would be great, and I certainly will be happy to help with any issue you
might have with it, or to discuss any feature you're missing.

Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)