* Peter Zijlstra (a.p.zijls...@chello.nl) wrote: > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:30 +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > > > > In the original post of this mail thread, I proposed a way to export > > guest RAM ranges (Guest Physical Address-GPA) and their corresponding host > > host virtual mappings (Host Virtual Address-HVA) from QEMU (via QEMU > > monitor). > > The idea was to use this GPA to HVA mappings from tools like libvirt to bind > > specific parts of the guest RAM to different host nodes. This needed an > > extension to existing mbind() to allow binding memory of a process(QEMU) > > from a > > different process(libvirt). This was needed since we wanted to do all this > > from > > libvirt. > > > > Hence I was coming from that background when I asked for extending > > ms_mbind() to take a tid parameter. If QEMU community thinks that NUMA > > binding should all be done from outside of QEMU, it is needed, otherwise > > what you have should be sufficient. > > That's just retarded, and no you won't get such extentions. Poking at > another process's virtual address space is just daft. Esp. if there's no > actual reason for it.
Need to separate the binding vs the policy mgmt. The policy mgmt could still be done outside, whereas the binding could still be done from w/in QEMU. A simple monitor interface to rebalance vcpu memory allcoations to different nodes could very well schedule vcpu thread work in QEMU. So, I agree, even if there is some external policy mgmt, it could still easily work w/ QEMU to use Peter's proposed interface. thanks, -chris
