similar to: NUMA split mode?

John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> writes: > On 10/1/2017 8:38 AM, hw wrote: >> HP says that what they call "NUMA split mode" should be disabled in the >> BIOS of the Z800 workstation when running Linux. They are reasoning >> that Linux kernels do not support this feature and even might not boot >> if it?s enabled. > > hmm, that workstation is

On 10/1/2017 8:38 AM, hw wrote: > HP says that what they call "NUMA split mode" should be disabled in the > BIOS of the Z800 workstation when running Linux. They are reasoning > that Linux kernels do not support this feature and even might not boot > if it?s enabled. hmm, that workstation is a dual Xeon 56xx (Westmere-EP, derived from Nehalem), new in 2010 > Since it

The memory relating guest domain should be allocated from NUMA node on which the guest runs. Because the latency of the same NUMA node is faster than that of a different one. This patch fixes memory allocation for Address Translation Structure of VT-d. VT-d uses two types of Structures for DMA address translation. The one is Device Assignment Structure. The other is Address Translation

On 10/1/2017 9:10 PM, hw wrote: > I?m trying to download the PDF you pointed me to, but the download is > stalled. I?m running Centos 7.4, but perhaps there?s an explanation > in the PDF that might tell me what NUMA split mode is supposed to be. it loaded fine here again tonight.? huh. the gist of the article is that they got at best 2-4% improvements with RHEL 6/SLES 6 on dual

When reducing the number of physical cpus available for Domain-0 by xl cpupool-numa-split, reduce the number of vcpus accordingly. Signed-off-by: juergen.gross@ts.fujitsu.com 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com

Hi, the implementation of xl cpupool-numa-split is broken. It basically deals with only one poolid, but there are two to consider: the one from the original root CPUpool, the other from the newly created one. On my machine the current output looks like: root@dosorca:/data/images# xl cpupool-numa-split libxl: error: libxl.c:2803:libxl_create_cpupool Could not create cpupool error on creating

Hi all. I'm looking for an advice on how to deal with inefficient code generation for Intel Nehalem/Westmere architecture on 64-bit platform for the attached test.cpp (LLVM IR is in test.cpp.ll). The inner loop has 11 iterations and eventually unrolled. Test.lea.s is the assembly code of the outer loop. It simply has 11 loads, 11 FP add, 11 FP mull, 1 FP store and lea+mov for index

It is my actual target architecture ________________________________ From: Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2019 1:30 PM To: J S Cc: via llvm-dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Generating object files more efficiently I copied "-march=XYZ" from your original email, you have to replace it with your actual target architecture or simply drop it.

Johannes, I tried the last one and it gave me this: error: unknown target CPU 'XYZ' note: valid target CPU values are: nocona, core2, penryn, bonnell, atom, silvermont, slm, goldmont, goldmont-plus, tremont, nehalem, corei7, westmere, sandybridge, corei7-avx, ivybridge, core-avx-i, haswell, core-avx2, broadwell, skylake, skylake-avx512, skx, cascadelake,

My system is a dual Xeon E5540 (Nehalem) HP Proliant DL380G6. When switching between Xen 4.0.2-rc1-pre and Xen 4.1-unstable I noticed that the NUMA info as shown by the Xen ''u'' debug-key is different. More specifically, the CPU to node mapping is alternating for 4.0.2 and grouped sequentially for 4.1. This difference affects the allocation (wrt node/socket) of pinned VCPUs to the

I've seen this consistently on three systems, with three different cards, and multiple versions of DAHDI. At first I thought the issue only occurred on newer, Nehalem-based, systems, but I reproduced it on a Core 2 Duo box as well. I've tested with dahdi-linux 2.2.0.2, dadhi- linux-complete 2.0.0+2.0.0, 2.1.0.2+2.1.0.2, and 2.2.0.2+2.2.0. The card is a Digium TE220B which uses the

This sounds like llvm.org/pr13320. On 17 September 2013 18:20, Bader, Aleksey A <aleksey.a.bader at intel.com> wrote: > Hi all. > > > > I’m looking for an advice on how to deal with inefficient code generation > for Intel Nehalem/Westmere architecture on 64-bit platform for the attached > test.cpp (LLVM IR is in test.cpp.ll). > > The inner loop has 11 iterations

Hi , I'm looking for a possibility to simulate a VM (to be used as a host) reporting no or empty NUMA <cells> in 'virsh capabilities'. 'virsh capabilities' usually reports single NUMA in the VMs, like <numa> <cell id='0' cpus='0-63' memory='16777216' unit='KiB'/> </numa> I appreciate if someone could advise Thank you

-march for clang and -march for llc do different things unfortunately. -march for clang at least on x86 is the same as -mcpu in llc. Which is an artifact of gcc compatibility. ~Craig On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 1:40 PM Doerfert, Johannes via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Oh, my bad. > > > Idk why llc seems to know that architecture but clang does not. > >

i''m reading up on numa usage. so far, i''ve enabled numa on my Xen box. @ Dom0 i see, xm dmesg | grep -i numa (XEN) Command line: ... numa=on ... (XEN) No NUMA configuration found i guess i need to ''configure'' numa. i''ve no clue how, and haven''t found the docs for it yet, despite looking. i found this old thread,

On 19.09.19 16:22, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Will be needed by virtio-mem to identify the node from a pxm. > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw at rjwysocki.net> > Cc: Len Brown <lenb at kernel.org> > Cc: linux-acpi at vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/numa.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1

Hi, I am a Masters student from Carnegie Mellon University. I am looking for a research topics for an Advanced OS & DS course we have. I wanted to know what is the current support for NUMA on Xen ? Does it support the IBM x440 and AMD64 Opteron ? Also, does the Xen scheduler do NUMA aware scheduling so it does not degrade the VM performace ? My group is currently looking into Scheduling

On 19.09.19 16:22, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Will be needed by virtio-mem to identify the node from a pxm. > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw at rjwysocki.net> > Cc: Len Brown <lenb at kernel.org> > Cc: linux-acpi at vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/numa.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1

The two address pass is only concerned about register pressure. It sounds like it should be taught about profitability. In cases where profitability can only be determined with something machinetracemetric then it probably should live it to more sophisticated pass like regalloc. In this case, we probably need a profitability target hook which knows about lea. We should also consider disabling

Hi folks, we are using a Tyan TK8W 2885 Mainboard (latest BIOS) w/ 2 Dual Core Opteron 280EE and 8GB of RAM (4GB per Socket). Furthermore we run CentOS 5.1 w/ Xen 3.2.1. (build from SRPM). We also tried 3.2.0. I tried both, the CentOS 5.1 Xen Kernel as well as the latest RHEL 5.2 Kernel but we do not get two NUMA domains as we (in my opinion) are supposed to. Do we need to recompile anything?