>>> On 03.03.15 at 04:42, <raistlin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 18:19 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> In this case, a pnode of XEN_NO_NUMA_NODE seems like precisely the >> correct value to report. >> > Indeed. It tells Xen: <<hey Xen, toolstack here: we either don't care or > could not come up with any sane vnode-to-pnode mapping, please figure > that out yourself>>. > > That makes the code, IMO, simpler at any level. In fact, at Xen level, > there is a default way to deal with the situation (the striping) > already. At the toolstack level, we can only care about trying to come > up with some super-cool and super-good (for performance) configuration > and just give up, if anything like what David and Andrew said occurs.
See my earlier reply - the tool stack at least giving hints to the hypervisor in such a case would likely still be better (for the final result) than leaving it entirely up to the hypervisor: "No node" really means allocate from anywhere, whereas some specific node passed in still allows the hypervisor to find second best fits when having to fall back. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
