On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 03:24:47AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>(Chao Gao got lost from the recipients list again; re-adding)
>
On 08.05.17 at 11:13, wrote:
>> On 08/05/17 17:15, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrot
(Chao Gao got lost from the recipients list again; re-adding)
>>> On 08.05.17 at 11:13, wrote:
> On 08/05/17 17:15, Chao Gao wrote:
>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 20
On 08/05/17 17:15, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
>>> On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>> I compared
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 02:39:25AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.05.17 at 18:15, wrote:
>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap
>>> On 08.05.17 at 18:15, wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
>>> On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>> I compared
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:21:27AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
>> On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
> I compared the maximum of #entry in one list and #ev
>>> On 03.05.17 at 12:08, wrote:
> On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
I compared the maximum of #entry in one list and #event (adding entry to
PI blocking list) with and without the t
On 02/05/17 06:45, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> I compared the maximum of #entry in one list and #event (adding entry to
>>> PI blocking list) with and without the three latter patches. Here
>>> is the res
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>> I compared the maximum of #entry in one list and #event (adding entry to
>> PI blocking list) with and without the three latter patches. Here
>> is the result:
>> --
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:44:26AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Chao Gao wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
VT-d PI introduces a per-pCPU blocking list to track the blocked vCPU
r
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> VT-d PI introduces a per-pCPU blocking list to track the blocked vCPU
>>> running on the pCPU. Theoretically, there are 32K domain on single
>>
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:39:57PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
>> VT-d PI introduces a per-pCPU blocking list to track the blocked vCPU
>> running on the pCPU. Theoretically, there are 32K domain on single
>> host, 128 vCPUs per domain. If all vCPUs are blocked o
On 26/04/17 01:52, Chao Gao wrote:
> VT-d PI introduces a per-pCPU blocking list to track the blocked vCPU
> running on the pCPU. Theoretically, there are 32K domain on single
> host, 128 vCPUs per domain. If all vCPUs are blocked on the same pCPU,
> 4M vCPUs are in the same list. Travelling this i
>>> On 26.04.17 at 05:30, wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 02:19:22AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 26.04.17 at 02:52, wrote:
>>> Patch 2/4 randomly distritbutes entries (vCPUs) among all oneline
>>> pCPUs, which can theoretically decrease the maximum of #entry
>>> in the list by N times. N
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 02:19:22AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.04.17 at 02:52, wrote:
>> Patch 2/4 randomly distritbutes entries (vCPUs) among all oneline
>> pCPUs, which can theoretically decrease the maximum of #entry
>> in the list by N times. N is #pCPU.
>
>Why randomly? Shouldn't cur
>>> On 26.04.17 at 02:52, wrote:
> Patch 2/4 randomly distritbutes entries (vCPUs) among all oneline
> pCPUs, which can theoretically decrease the maximum of #entry
> in the list by N times. N is #pCPU.
Why randomly? Shouldn't current list length determine which CPU(s)
to prefer?
Jan
_
16 matches
Mail list logo
