On 18.06.2014 [16:33:55 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28:53AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 17.06.2014 [16:22:33 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:38:16AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > > On 17.06.2014 [11:07:00 -0300],
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28:53AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 17.06.2014 [16:22:33 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:38:16AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > On 17.06.2014 [11:07:00 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > >
> > > > > If it is canonical and
On 17.06.2014 [16:22:33 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:38:16AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 17.06.2014 [11:07:00 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >
> > > > If it is canonical and kosher way of using NUMA in QEMU, ok, we can use
> > > > it.
> > > > I just f
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:38:16AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 17.06.2014 [11:07:00 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>
> > > If it is canonical and kosher way of using NUMA in QEMU, ok, we can use
> > > it.
> > > I just fail to see why we need a requirement for nodes to go consequently
>
On 17.06.2014 [11:07:00 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > If it is canonical and kosher way of using NUMA in QEMU, ok, we can use it.
> > I just fail to see why we need a requirement for nodes to go consequently
> > here. And it confuses me as a user a bit if I can add "-numa
> > node,nodeid=22"
On 16.06.2014 [22:41:08 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:25:00PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> [...]
> > > But you seem to claim you need 3 nodes with non-contiguous IDs. In that
> > > case, which exactly is the guest-visible difference you expect to get
> > > betwe
On 16.06.2014 [22:37:00 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:25:00PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 16.06.2014 [17:51:50 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 03:51:35PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 06:51 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >> On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >>> c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first
On 06/17/2014 06:51 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
>>> introduced regression which prevents from runni
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:25:00PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
[...]
> > But you seem to claim you need 3 nodes with non-contiguous IDs. In that
> > case, which exactly is the guest-visible difference you expect to get
> > between:
> > -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0-7,memory=0 \
> > -numa nod
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:25:00PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 16.06.2014 [17:51:50 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is
On 16.06.2014 [17:51:50 -0300], Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
> > > introduced regression which preven
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 06:16:29PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
> > introduced regression which prevents from running guests with memoryless
> > NUMA node#0 which ma
On 16.06.2014 [18:16:29 +1000], Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
> > introduced regression which prevents from running guests with memoryless
> > NUMA node#0 which may happen o
On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
> introduced regression which prevents from running guests with memoryless
> NUMA node#0 which may happen on real POWER8 boxes and which would make
> sense to debug in QEMU.
>
c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node"
introduced regression which prevents from running guests with memoryless
NUMA node#0 which may happen on real POWER8 boxes and which would make
sense to debug in QEMU.
This patchset aim is to fix that and also fix various code
16 matches
Mail list logo
