[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] RFC: Still TODO for 4.2? xl domain numa memory allocation vs xm/xend

On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 16:58 +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 16:21 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: 
> > With your affinity patches and the domain restricted to a single node
> > via cpu affinity The Right Thing seems to happen.
> > 
> > cpupools don't seem to do this, I don't know if that is expected or not.
> > 
> Glad to know my patches are (well, could be!) useful for something!
> About cpupool, I think if a domain is created as part of the pool, the
> very same behaviour you achieve with my patches should be expected.
> However, as George is correctly pointing out, that might turn out to be
> quite bad if the domain is then moved! :-(

It's no worse than starting a VM with CPUS pinned one way and then
changing it -- you might end up with CPUS with pessimal access to the
memory assigned to the guest.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.