Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated from
On 26/02/15 13:54, Jan Beulich wrote: Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper andrew.coop...@citrix.com ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated from
On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:36 +, Jan Beulich wrote: On 27.02.15 at 14:27, dario.faggi...@citrix.com wrote: I'm asking because I really don't like vcpu_to_node(). And I'm not talking about how it is implemented (there probably are not much alternatives), I'm saying I don't think it should exist, and I really would see value in killing it. :-) I'm all for killing it. In fact I'd also like to see domain_to_node() go away, as it's similarly bogus (no matter of the proposed changed implementation) - neither a vCPU nor a domain have a focus node or some such (some may happen to if their node mask has just a single set bit, but that's nothing code should depend on). I totally agree. I didn't go as far as far as suggesting that because, if my grep-ing is not failing, it's still in use in two more places, even with your series applied. But yes, we really should make it possible to remove it too. (And btw, at the very least first_node() in your proposal should become any_node().) Except, there is no such function. But again, I agree, and if we get to the point where we can kill vcpu_to_node() but need to keep domain_to_node, we can of course implement it. :-) Regards, Dario signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated from
On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:46 +, Ian Campbell wrote: On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:27 +, Dario Faggioli wrote: After this series, vcpu_to_node() (defined in xen/include/xen/numa.h) is left with only one use, in xen/arch/arm/domain.c, besides of course being used to implement domain_to_node() (still in xen/include/xen/numa.h). So, provided ARM people (and I'm Cc-ing them) can get rid of that, Happy to do so if you have advise on what to replace it with, just 0? As Julien says, with the MEMF_no_owner feature Jan is introducing in the series. We don't do NUMA yet on ARM so that would be fine, but eventually we'd want the vcpu stack to be allocated in some sort of sensible relative to vcpu affinity location... Yes, and Jan's MEMF_no_owner, if it works on your arch too, as it seems it could, will provide exactly that. Regards, Dario signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/5] x86: widen NUMA nodes to be allocated from
On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:38 +, Julien Grall wrote: Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli dario.faggi...@citrix.com One question (a genuine one, i.e., I'm really not sure what I'm saying is correct). After this series, vcpu_to_node() (defined in xen/include/xen/numa.h) is left with only one use, in xen/arch/arm/domain.c, besides of course being used to implement domain_to_node() (still in xen/include/xen/numa.h). So, provided ARM people (and I'm Cc-ing them) can get rid of that, can that macro be removed all together, and domain_to_node(d) be defined after d-node_affinity... something like: Given the changes made by Jan on x86, I think we could replace vcpu_to_node by MEMF_no_owner. I expected this to be the case. Happy to hear it is! :-) FWIW, we don't have any NUMA support on ARM currently. I know. Thanks and Regards, Dario signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
