|
From: | Anthony Liguori |
Subject: | [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] NUMA: promoting NUMA topology to BIOS and pin guest memory |
Date: | Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:42:13 -0600 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) |
Andre Przywara wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:ACK. Actually I'd had to add code to prevent pinning from the command line. I think this doesn't hurt, if you use virtualization for partitioning (where a NUMA architecture can actually help you, because guests don't compete will all other guests for the memory bandwidth), it is quite helpful to specify everything at the beginning.Anthony Liguori wrote:At this point, I'm okay with introducing the libnuma dependency for memory pinning. I'm not sure I think we should even present this as a command line option though. I think the command line option should just specify the NUMA topology and then we should use a monitor command for pinning (as you do on your next patch).It's helpful to have static pinning from the command line. That's useful for quick tests for those of us who don't use management interfaces.Since the monitor and command line can share code, there shouldn't be any cost to this.
The thing that makes me uneasy about it is the fact that it's part of the base numa syntax. This combination of guest configuration and host configuration seems less than optimal to me. This isn't something that bothers me that much and won't keep me from applying the patches.
Regards, Anthony Liguori
Here even UP guest can take advantage: -numa 1,pin:1 Regards, Andre.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |