search for: affine

in _csched_cpu_pick(), as not doing so may result in the domain''s node-affinity mask (as retrieved by csched_balance_cpumask() ) and online mask (as retrieved by cpupool_scheduler_cpumask() ) having an empty intersection. Therefore, when attempting a node-affinity load balancing step and running this: ... /* Pick an online CPU from the proper affinity mask */

If the domain''s NUMA node-affinity is being specified by the user/toolstack (instead of being automatically computed by Xen), we really should stick to that. This means domain_update_node_affinity() is wrong when it filters out some stuff from there even in "!auto" mode. This commit fixes that. Of course, this does not mean node-affinity is always honoured (e.g., a vcpu

What is the best way to pin VCPUs. It looks like the implementation of affinity currently is at best only "soft". Regards, K. Y _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 12:05?PM Yongji Xie <xieyongji at bytedance.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 11:44?AM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 11:33?AM Yongji Xie <xieyongji at bytedance.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 11:14?AM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: >

Hello everyone, I'm trying to use LLVM+Polly to obtain a polyhedral representation of some loops to use later for passes I want to implement, but seems like Polly will stop when reaching any statement that has non-affine access functions of the loop bounds discarding the whole SCoP entirely. What I would like to achieve is still getting some information for the statements that , instead, have affine access functions, practically "ignoring" the non-affine ones. There is a way to do such a thing? Thanks...

Hi, I'm using Polly to analyze memory access patterns for an university project and I'm trying to get polly working on some loops that polly marks as "containing non affine branches" . >From what I understand polly skips Scops that contain these branches (which comprises something like "if (i % 2 == 0)" where i is a loop varying variable) because these kind of branches can make , in practice , non affine the accesses to the memory operands even if t...

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 11:03?AM Yongji Xie <xieyongji at bytedance.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 2:28?PM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 1:31?PM Xie Yongji <xieyongji at bytedance.com> wrote: > > > > > > To support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism, > > > this makes use of

On 10/01/2011 03:26 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm trying to use LLVM+Polly to obtain a polyhedral representation of > some loops to use later for passes I want to implement, but seems like > Polly will stop when reaching any statement that has non-affine access > functions of the loop bounds discarding the whole SCoP entirely. > > What I would like to achieve is still getting some information for the > statements that , instead, have affine access functions, practically > "ignoring" the non-affine ones. > > There is a...

On 02/08/2012 08:08 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: > Hi, I'm using Polly to analyze memory access patterns for an > university project and I'm trying to get polly working on some loops > that polly marks as "containing non affine branches" . Hi Marcello, sorry for the long delay. > From what I understand polly skips Scops that contain these branches > (which comprises something like "if (i % 2 == 0)" where i is a loop > varying variable) because these kind of branches can make , in > practice...

On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 05:36:02PM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 3:33 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 04:41:17PM +0800, Xie Yongji wrote: > > > Export irq_create_affinity_masks() so that some modules > > > can make use of it to implement interrupt affinity > > > spreading

On 11/18/2011 01:34 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: > Ok , this is what I believe is the final patch that adds the > non-affine accept functionality to Polly, this should have no issues. > > I added three tests, two in ScopInfo (two simple tests, one expected > fail and one success based on the same source) and one in CodeGen that > verifies that the code is generated. > > The patch is attached. The patch...

Modified function runq_candidate in the credit 2 scheduler to have it consider hard and soft affinity when choosing the next vCPU from the run queue to run on the given pCPU. Function now chooses the vCPU with the most credit that has hard affinity and maybe soft affinity for the given pCPU. If it does not have soft affinity and there is another vCPU that prefers to run on the given pCPU, then as

>>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >>> want >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >>> instead >>> of disabling it at all. >>> >>> And I'm not convinced this is really needed, driver only provide affinity >>> hint instead of affinity, so it's

>>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >>> want >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >>> instead >>> of disabling it at all. >>> >>> And I'm not convinced this is really needed, driver only provide affinity >>> hint instead of affinity, so it's

Hello, According to the docs, vcpupin will use either cgroups or sched_setaffinity to pin vcpu threads to cpus. How is this decision made? I observe differences even on different hosts featuring the same version of libvirtd (1.3.1): on one host vcpupin affects cpuset.cpus (cgroup), and on the other it affects vcpu threads affinity (observed through taskset). Thanks, Nikos -------------- next

...<tobias at grosser.es>: > On 02/08/2012 08:08 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: >> >> Hi, I'm using Polly to analyze memory access patterns for an >> university project and I'm trying to get polly working on some loops >> that polly marks as "containing non affine branches" . > > > Hi Marcello, > > sorry for the long delay. Don't worry for that :) >>  From what I understand polly skips Scops that contain these branches >> (which comprises something like "if (i % 2 == 0)" where i is a loop >> varying varia...

Hello, My testing machine has 2 quad-core CPU (It supports hyperthreading, but i disable it in BIOS). I uses Xen 4.0.1 as the hypervisor. When I use 8 VMs to conduct a test, CPU affinity of the VMs is very strange. Like this: vm_name vcpu_num cpu_affinity Domain-0 8 any VM1 4 1,3,5,7 VM2 4 1,3,5,7 VM3 4 1,3,5,7 VM4 4

...; Hi Michael, > > Although the approach to use a higher order in-memory abstraction like the > loop tree will make it easier than what you have today, if you used MLIR > for this representation, you already get a round trippable textual format > that is *very close* to your form. The affine.for/if, std.for/if in MLIR > are nearly isomorphic to the tree representation you want, and as such, > this drastically reduces the delta between the in-memory data structures > your passes want to operate on and what you see when you print the IR. > Normally, there'd be resistance...

Hello Everyone: We can't create vm on a physical server with 64 CPU(as reported by /proc/cpuinfo). The error message is: "cannot set CPU affinity on process 0" The following is the capabilities detected by libvirt: <arch>x86_64</arch> <model>Westmere</model> <vendor>Intel</vendor> <topology sockets='4'

When in SYS_STATE_suspend, and going through the cpu_disable_scheduler path, save a copy of the current cpu affinity, and mark a flag to restore it later. Later, in the resume process, when enabling nonboot cpus restore these affinities. v2: Fix formatting problems. remove early return in cpu_disable_scheduler() path. v3: Fix remaining errant tab Move restore_vcpu_affinity() to thaw_domains(),