From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [Hackathon minutes] PV frontends/backends and NUMA
 machines
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:43:42 +0100
Message-ID: <519B6BFE02000078000D7A5A@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1305201443510.4799@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<CAFLBxZbonzEwo4mF6PTSq6WQjU2haN_Ray-Z_3Td83i=f7zsbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130521083251.GD9626@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
	<CAFLBxZbSj0E7r9pmFpcpTFtBQOQsDK4NcftUEULqemBksEab3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<519B632902000078000D79C4@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<1369132208.12423.41.camel@Solace>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1369132208.12423.41.camel@Solace>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 21.05.13 at 12:30, Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> wrote:
> On mar, 2013-05-21 at 11:06 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> At 14:48 +0100 on 20 May (1369061330), George Dunlap wrote:
>> > The second is to make the pfn -> NUMA node layout reasonable.  At the
>> > moment, as I understand it, pfns will be striped across nodes.  In
>> > theory dom0 could deal with this, but it seems like in practice it's
>> > going to be nasty trying to sort that stuff out.  It would be much
>> > better, if you have (say) 4 nodes and 4GiB of memory assigned to dom0,
>> > to have pfn 0-1G on node 0, 1-2G on node 2, &c.
>> 
>> I have been having a todo list item since around the release of 4.2
>> to add support for "dom0_mem=node<n>" and
>> "dom0_vcpus=node<n>" command line options, which I would think
>> would be sufficient to deal with that. 
>>
> I remember such discussion (which, BTW, is here:
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00332.html ).
> However, wasn't that supposed to help only in case you want to confine
> Dom0 on one specific node?
> 
> That would definitely be already something, but not quite the same thing
> that came up in Dublin, and that George was describing above (although I
> agree it covers a sensible subset of it :-) ).

I certainly meant to implement both such that multiple nodes would
be permitted.

Jan