[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] SMP guest support in unstable tree.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Christian Limpach wrote: > On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:06:10AM -0600, Andrew Theurer wrote: > > >I don't think there's significant overhead if there's only a single > > >virtual cpu pinned to one physical cpu so I wouldn't expect a noticeable > > >performance advantage if we handled this case differently. > > > > > Hopefully soon I can get some performance tests going and we can see if > > there's any issues here. My other concern would be on larger (multi > > numa-node) systems, even with one to one mapping, that the hardware > > topology (numa) information does not make it to the SMP guest -it would > > be nice to take advantage of the numa work developed in the linux kernel > > over that last 2 years. I am not sure exactly what impact this could be. > > Yes, this is probably even needed on 2-cpu with 2 hyperthreads systems. > Right now, all virtual cpus are presented as independent physical cpus > to the domains and the domains can't easily tell if two virtual cpus > run on different physical cpus, on different hyperthreads on the same > cpu or on the same hyperthread. If we export this information to the > guest, we'll then probably also have to have a way to inform the guest > if a virtual cpu is moved to a different hyperthread or physical cpu. Also consider the NUMA equation. Search l-k for cpusets. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |