[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10 09/25] x86: refactor psr: L3 CAT: set value: implement framework.
>>> On 13.04.17 at 13:11, <yi.y.sun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 17-04-13 04:58:06, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 13.04.17 at 12:49, <yi.y.sun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > How about a per socket array like this: >> > uint32_t domain_switch[1024]; >> > >> > Every bit represents a domain id. Then, we can handle this case as below: >> > 1. In 'psr_cpu_init()', clear the array to be 0. I think this place is >> > enough to >> > cover socket offline case. We do not need to clear it in >> > 'free_socket_resources'. >> > >> > 2. In 'psr_ctxt_switch_to()', test_and_set_bit(domain_id, domain_switch) >> > to set >> > the bit to 1 according to domain_id. If the old value is 0 and the >> > 'psr_cos_ids[socket]' is not 0, restore 'psr_cos_ids[socket]' to be 0. >> > >> > 3. In 'psr_set_val()', test_and_set_bit(domain_id, domain_switch) to set >> > the bit >> > to 1 too. Then, update 'psr_cos_ids[socket]' according to find/pick >> > flow. >> > >> > Then, we only use 4KB for one socket. >> >> This looks to come closer to something I'd consider acceptable, but >> I may not understand your intentions in full yet: For one, there's >> nowhere you clear the bit (other than presumably during socket >> cleanup). > > Actually, clear the array in 'free_socket_resources' has same effect. I can > move clear action into it. That wasn't my point - I was asking about clearing individual bits. Point being that if you only ever set bits in the map, you'll likely end up iterating through all active domains anyway. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |