Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 14/14] libxl: automatic NUMA placement affects soft affinity

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 19:18 +0100, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> diff --git a/docs/misc/xl-numa-placement.markdown 
> b/docs/misc/xl-numa-placement.markdown
> index b1ed361..f644758 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/xl-numa-placement.markdown
> +++ b/docs/misc/xl-numa-placement.markdown
> @@ -126,10 +126,22 @@ or Xen won't be able to guarantee the locality for 
> their memory accesses.
>  That, of course, also mean the vCPUs of the domain will only be able to
>  execute on those same pCPUs.
>  
> +Starting from 4.4, is is also possible to specify a "cpus\_soft=" option

s/Starting from 4.4, /It/

> +in the xl config file. This, independently from whether or not "cpus=" is
> +specified too, affect the NUMA placement in a way very similar to what

"affects".

> +is described above. In fact, the hypervisor will build up the node-affinity
> +of the VM basing right on it or, if both pinning (via "cpus=") and soft

"basing right on it" -- what does that mean?

> +affinity (via "cpus\_soft=") are present, basing on their intersection.

"based on"

> +
> +Besides that, "cpus\_soft=" also means, of course, that the vCPUs of the

s/Besides that, // 
s/, of course, //

You aren't being graded against a target word limit you know ;-)

> +domain will prefer to execute on, among the pCPUs where they can run,
> +those particular pCPUs.

Isn't "among the pCPUs where they can run" here somewhat redundant too?

Ian.



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