Re: [Hackathon minutes] PV frontends/backends and NUMA machines

[Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1360 bytes --]

On mar, 2013-05-21 at 12:47 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.05.13 at 12:58, Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> wrote:
> > Well, sure, but then, again, how do you control which (and not only how
> > much) memory is taken from which node?
> 
> Hmm, I may not have followed, but why is "which" important here at
> all? The only (usual) restriction should apply regarding preservation of
> memory below 4G.
> 
It is if you want Dom0 to think it is running, say, on 2 nodes and
actually have the memory, say, in the range 0-1G accessed quicker from
d0v0 (vcpu0 of Dom0), and the vice versa with memory within 1-2G and
d0v1.

That enables NUMA optimization _inside_ Dom0, like the pinning of the
backends and all the other stuff discussed (during the Hackathon and) in
this thread.

However, to do that, we, I think, need to be able not only to specify
that we want 1G worth of memory on one specific node, but also to
request explicitly for some of Dom0's PFN to be here and for some others
to be there, as we were saying earlier in the thread with Tim.

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)


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel