[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.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
