similar to: [LLVMdev] Pinning registers in LLVM

On Jun 28, 2009, at 11:00 PM, David Terei wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on using LLVM as a back-end for an existing compiler (GHC > Haskell compiler) Very cool! > and one of the problems I'm having is pinning a > global variable to a actual machine register. I've seen mixed > terminology for this feature/idea, so what I mean by this is that I > want to be

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:00 PM, David Terei<davidterei at gmail.com> wrote: > So just hoping this can be done with LLVM and if so, then how. Despite the fact that llvm-gcc accepts the given code, the extension isn't properly supported; the current output is close to correct, but not quite. The issue is that the register allocator isn't aware of the global register, and can

Wondering if I can get some opinions on dom0 CPU pinning and xm weighting. We have several xen servers on SLES11SP1 and up to this point we have never done anything with pinning CPU''s to dom0. We''re trying to decide if we should be doing that. Same goes for xm weighting (if I''m saying that correctly). For example, running the following command when a xen server

On 01/04/16 09:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:14:33AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >> --- a/kernel/smp.c >> +++ b/kernel/smp.c >> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ >> #include <linux/smp.h> >> #include <linux/cpu.h> >> #include <linux/sched.h> >> +#include <linux/hypervisor.h> >> >> #include

On 01/04/16 10:44, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 10:28:46AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 01/04/16 09:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:14:33AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> --- a/kernel/smp.c >>>> +++ b/kernel/smp.c >>>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ >>>> #include <linux/smp.h>

Xen uses lazy pinning of MM structures including the page table root and LDT, which requires hooks at context creation and destruction time to maintain the lazy list. Patch-against: 2.6.13-rc5-mm1 Patch-keys: i386 mmu paravirt xen Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> Index: linux-2.6.13/include/asm-i386/mmu_context.h

Xen uses lazy pinning of MM structures including the page table root and LDT, which requires hooks at context creation and destruction time to maintain the lazy list. Patch-against: 2.6.13-rc5-mm1 Patch-keys: i386 mmu paravirt xen Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> Index: linux-2.6.13/include/asm-i386/mmu_context.h

Hi all, It seems no matter how many vCPU I allocated to the VM, the auto-generated vCPU pinning configuration won't cover more than 8 CPUs. Is that normal? Otherwise what should I do? Will vCPU pinning by virsh be more effective? Regards, Allen 2014-10-28 Allen Qiu

On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 11:03:21AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > > Maybe just make the vpin thing an option like: > > > > smp_call_on_cpu(int (*func)(void *), int phys_cpu); > > Also; is something like the vpin thing possible on KVM? because if we're > > going to expose it to generic code like this we had maybe look at wider > > support. > > It is

On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 11:03:21AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > > Maybe just make the vpin thing an option like: > > > > smp_call_on_cpu(int (*func)(void *), int phys_cpu); > > Also; is something like the vpin thing possible on KVM? because if we're > > going to expose it to generic code like this we had maybe look at wider > > support. > > It is

Hi I'd want to pin the vcpu of a guest to a pcpu. the docs clearly say https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Virtualization_Administration_Guide/ch09s04.html "Locking a guest to a particular NUMA node offers no benefit if that node does not have sufficient free memory for that guest. libvirt stores information on the free memory available on

Hi, I have found the cpu time partitioning based on cpu shares weights not very intuitive. On RHEL64, I deployed two qemu/kvm VMs VM1 with 1 vcpu and 512 cpu shares VM2 with 2 vcpus and 1024 cpu shares I pinned their vcpus to specific host pcpus: VM1 vcpu 0 to host pcpu1 VM2 vcpu 0 to host pcpu1, VM2 vcpu 1 to host pcpu2 I executed inside the VMs a simple process that consume all

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 08:40:03AM +0000, WANG Cheng D wrote: >Dear all, > >I want my container to run on the third CPU core and I define this by the following xml scrpits: ><vcpu placement="static" cpuset="3">1</vcpu> > >When I run my application in a container terminal, I can see the application runs on the third core as expected. >When I run

On 21/03/16 14:42, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 21.03.16 at 13:24, <JGross at suse.com> wrote: >> @@ -758,9 +759,14 @@ struct smp_sync_call_struct { >> static void smp_call_sync_callback(struct work_struct *work) >> { >> struct smp_sync_call_struct *sscs; >> + unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > So this obtains the vCPU number, yet

On 10/29/2020 2:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 01:17:14PM -0700, si-wei liu wrote: >> On 10/15/2020 6:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 02:15:32PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> On 2020/10/14 ??7:42, si-wei liu wrote: >>>>>> So what I suggest is to fix the pinning leakage first and do the

Re-adding the libvirt-users list - please don't take discussions off-list. On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 01:10:18PM +0300, Anastasiya Ruzhanskaya wrote: > I already found out how to set up all the certificates and tls works fine > for me. > What if I want to put a proxy between client and server in libvirt? He has > his own CA, and this is only one more CA I would like libvirt to trust

Hi everyone, I''m running Xen on an SMP machine. Couple of things: a) is dom0 pinned to a particular CPU? if so which? can I control the choice? b) with the 2.6.10 Xenolinux kernel, cat /proc/cpuinfo shows only a single CPU on my SMP machine. Is this a known problem/behavior? c) if I understand correctly, the BVT scheduler parameters are CPU specific -- they don''t aggregate

This eliminates a deadlock and reduces (sometimes significantly) the time interrupts are off during context switch. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Well, there's a bug in the globbing for the tcsh with 5.4, and my boss has filed a bug report. Meanwhile, I downgraded tcsh on those systems whose users use that as their shell. Until it's resolved, he wants me to pin the version. Googling, I see someone a few years ago, answering someone's question, suggested adding exclude=openoffice* near the top of /etc/yum.conf. I also see, more