On 07/17/2013 03:29 AM, Wanlong Gao wrote:
> The memory policy setting format is like:
> policy={membind|interleave|preferred},host-node=[+|!]{all|N-N}
> And we are adding this setting as a suboption of "-numa mem,",
> the memory policy then can be set like following:
> -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0 \
> -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=1 \
> -numa mem,nodeid=0,size=1G,policy=membind,host-nodes=0-1 \
> -numa mem,nodeid=1,size=1G,policy=interleave,host-nodes=!1
>
> Reviewed-by: Bandan Das <b...@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanl...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> +++ b/qapi-schema.json
> @@ -3717,9 +3717,15 @@
> #
> # @size: #optional memory size of this node
> #
> +# @policy: #optional memory policy of this node
> +#
> +# @host-nodes: #optional host nodes for its memory policy
> +#
> # Since 1.6
> ##
> { 'type': 'NumaMemOptions',
> 'data': {
> '*nodeid': 'int',
> - '*size': 'size' }}
> + '*size': 'size',
> + '*policy': 'str',
What are the valid values for 'policy'? If it is a finite set, please
make an 'enum' type that lists the valid values, and make this
'*policy':'NumaMemPolicy' rather than a free-form 'str'.
> + '*host-nodes': 'str' }}
Missing documentation on how this 'str' is formatted, and same concerns
as in 1/12 about whether it is the right JSON representation, or whether
you have crammed too much information into a single string that now
requires post-processing. Why is an array not a better choice?
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
