[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] VCPU affinity

To: "Ky Srinivasan" <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>
From: Emmanuel Ackaouy <ackaouy@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:01:45 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 03:11:25 -0800
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=DJXywhkdcG1dxF8pW0vxoPfu5IryWUN+ZF4uat5PawN6y0wUqeJvD1fc3k8whMijgtvEVwc/YpUG9p+lP3rDJvg/AIlNf3namiZ703LeodBl0PtIf3cWsRMMKOMAFYL6asBE1VdX3TTSJFA7HXyHBaypiyOpNmLBmuQZw4wWvxU=
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

On Dec 18, 2006, at 16:56, Ky Srinivasan wrote:

What is the best way to pin VCPUs. It looks like the implementation ofaffinity currently is at best only "soft".
Regards,


VCPU affinity should not be soft. By the time the set affinity hypercall
returns, the VCPU in question should be running on a physical CPU
set in its affinity mask.

If it's not behaving this way then something is broken. Can you send
more details?


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] VCPU affinity
  - From: Ky Srinivasan

References:
- [Xen-devel] VCPU affinity
  - From: Ky Srinivasan

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: What is more secure? HVM or PV ?
Next by Date: [Fwd: Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] bt878 based dvr card vs. pci pass-thru]
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] VCPU affinity
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] VCPU affinity
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.