WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4 of 4] Support new xl command cpupool-numa-split

To: Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4 of 4] Support new xl command cpupool-numa-split
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:12:02 +0000
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 05:13:15 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4CFF7812.4050506@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc.
References: <f31333fe3b3553c90419.1290755427@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1291806978.13966.4529.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4CFF7812.4050506@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 12:20 +0000, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 12/08/10 12:16, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >
> > There seems to be no way to find out the number of pools without also
> > getting all the info about them, which is a shame.
> 
> Taking a quick look I couldn't spot any way how to find out the number
> of domains without also getting all the info about them, too...

Yeah. It's not important, just an observation.
> 
> >
> >> +    /* Reset Pool-0 to 1st node */
> >> +    node = topology->nodemap.array[0];
> >> +    libxl_for_each_cpu(c, cpumap) {
> >> +        if (!libxl_cpumap_test(&cpumap, c)&&  (c<  
> >> topology->nodemap.entries)&&
> >> +            (topology->nodemap.array[c] == node)) {
> >> +            ret = -libxl_cpupool_cpuadd(&ctx, poolid, c);
> >> +            if (ret) {
> >> +                fprintf(stderr, "error on adding cpu to Pool-0\n");
> >> +                goto out;
> >> +            }
> >> +            libxl_cpumap_reset(&freemap, c);
> >
> > (nt really related to this series but I wish this was called
> > libxl_cpumap_clear, I had to go check it wasn't resetting the whole map
> > or something...)
> 
> Hmm, do you really think so?
> It would make me to check whether it is clearing the whole map :-)

;-) I think I'm just used to the Linux clear_bit type naming scheme.

> I think the second parameter is a strong hint :-)

True.


> > Can this loop be merged with the preceding loop, with the body being the
> > else case of the if?
> 
> No. I have to add new cpus first to avoid a cpupool without cpus in between.

ok.

I was thinking that because this function only gets here if there is a
single pool that all CPUs must be in that pool -- but that's not
actually true is it? Even if that were the common case there's nothing
to enforce that.

> > Do we want to rename Pool-0 at some point too or do we rely on that name
> > elsewhere?
> 
> Good question. There is a hard coded "Pool-0" reference in libxl, but this
> could easily be changed.
> I'm not sure about implications in xm/xend. I'll check this.

I don't think there is a particularly strong requirement to allow xend
and xl to coexist. I'd recommend just leaving xend doing what it does
today and fix xl/libxl only.

Ian.


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