[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DS0PR11MB63735722DBD08190B849DD9DDC329@DS0PR11MB6373.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 02:11:11 +0000
From: "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
To: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"dmatlack@...gle.com" <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
"andrew.jones@...ux.dev" <andrew.jones@...ux.dev>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 5/5] KVM: selftests: Allowing running
dirty_log_perf_test on specific CPUs
On Friday, October 28, 2022 4:03 AM, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> pthread_create() will internally call sched_setaffinity() syscall after creation of a
> thread on a random CPU. So, from the performance side there is not much
> difference between the two approaches.
The main difference I see is that the vcpu could be created on one NUMA node by
default initially and then gets pinned to another NUMA node.
>
> However, we will still need pin_this_task_to_pcpu()/sched_affinity()
> to move the main thread to a specific pCPU, therefore, I am thinking of keeping
> the current approach unless there is a strong objection to it.
I also don’t have strong objections, and it's up to you for now.
I will re-visit this later after the code consolidation patchset is landed
and see how this could be better consolidated from all user's perspective.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists