Hi Liuji, I'm the owner of bp support-libvirt-vcpu-topology, There are four main reasons that I did not continue to work on it: 1. the design proposal has not confirmed by core developers of nova 2. this bp is not accepted in Icehouse development stage 3. Daniel expects that this bp should consider together with the other one numa-aware-cpu-binding, but I have no idea to do this for now 4. I have no enough time to do this at this moment
2014-03-05 Wangpan 发件人："Liuji (Jeremy)" <jeremy....@huawei.com> 发送时间：2014-03-05 15:02 主题：Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Questions about guest NUMA and memory binding policies 收件人："OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> 抄送："Luohao \(brian\)"<brian.luo...@huawei.com>,"Yuanjing \(D\)"<yj.y...@huawei.com> Hi Steve, Thanks for your reply. I didn't know why the blueprint numa-aware-cpu-binding seems to have no more progress until read the two mails mentioned in your mail. The use case analysis in the mails are very clear, they are also what I concern about. I agree that we shouldn't provide pCPU/vCPU mapping for the ending user and how to provide them for the user need more consideration. The use cases I concern more are the pCPU's exclusively use(pCPU:vCPU=1:1) and the guest numa. Thanks, Jeremy Liu > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Gordon [mailto:sgor...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 10:29 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Cc: Luohao (brian); Yuanjing (D) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Questions about guest NUMA and memory > binding policies > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Hi, all > > > > I search the current blueprints and old mails in the mail list, but > > find nothing about Guest NUMA and setting memory binding policies. > > I just find a blueprint about vcpu topology and a blueprint about CPU > > binding. > > > > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-libvirt-vcpu-topol > > ogy https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/numa-aware-cpu-binding > > > > Is there any plan for the guest NUMA and memory binding policies setting? > > > > Thanks, > > Jeremy Liu > > Hi Jeremy, > > As you've discovered there have been a few attempts at getting some work > started in this area. Dan Berrange outlined some of the possibilities in this > area > in a previous mailing list post [1] though it's multi-faceted, there are a > lot of > different ways to break it down. If you dig into the details you will note > that the > support-libvirt-vcpu-topology blueprint in particular got a fair way along > but > there were some concerns noted in the code reviews and on the list [2] around > the design. > > It seems like this is an area that there is a decent amount of interest in > and we > should work on list to flesh out a design proposal, ideally this would be > presented for further discussion at the Juno design summit. What are your > particular needs/desires from a NUMA aware nova scheduler? > > Thanks, > > Steve > > [1] > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/019715.h > tml > [2] > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-December/022940.h > tml > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
