This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/6][RESEND] xen: Add NUMA support to Xen

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/6][RESEND] xen: Add NUMA support to Xen
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 08:49:22 +0100
Cc: Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ryan Grimm <grimm@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ryan Harper <ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 16 May 2006 00:54:27 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200605152246.30374.ak@xxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20060501215648.GU16776@xxxxxxxxxx> <dd8e79fae1047be14919a2432d163d28@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060515203242.GM16876@xxxxxxxxxx> <200605152246.30374.ak@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On 15 May 2006, at 21:46, Andi Kleen wrote:

What I'm fighting now is getting linux/arch/x86_64/mm/numa.c to build.
Some of the structures to track numa info (struct pglist_data) are
rather linux specific and include lots of structures related to Linux mm
zones, check out linux/include/linux/mmzone.h.  I attempted to avoid
bring in that in, but the pfn_to_nid/phys_to_nid macros are based on
memnodemap array.

I guess you can just replace setup_node_bootmem / setup_node_zones /
numa_free_all_bootmem with Xen specific functions. They should be the only
functions dealing with pglists and they're relatively straight forward.

Yes, my gut feeling looking at x86_64's numa.c is that it's going to need some heavier surgery than srat.c. I wouldn't worry so much about keeping that one close to the Linux original: if we end up pulling down more Linux memory bookkeeping code later then we can always go back and sync the file more closely. Keep it as clean as possible though, obviously (e.g., replacing whole functions is nicer than functions that are a hacky halfway house between Linux and Xen, etc).

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>