On 8/3/2020 7:00 PM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 05:31:56PM +0800, Luyao Zhong wrote:
Hi Libvirt experts,
I would like enhence the numatune snippet configuration. Given a
example snippet:
<domain>
...
<numatune>
<memory mode="strict" nodeset="1-4,^3"/>
<memnode cellid="0" mode="strict" nodeset="1"/>
<memnode cellid="2" mode="preferred" nodeset="2"/>
</numatune>
...
</domain>
Currently, attribute mode is either 'interleave', 'strict', or
'preferred',
I propose to add a new 'default' option. I give the reason as following.
Presume we are using cgroups v1, Libvirt sets cpuset.mems for all vcpu
threads
according to 'nodeset' in memory element. And translate the memnode
element to
qemu config options (--object memory-backend-ram) for per numa cell,
which
invoking mbind() system call at the end.[1]
But what if we want using default memory policy and request each guest
numa cell
pinned to different host memory nodes? We can't use mbind via qemu
config options,
because (I quoto here) "For MPOL_DEFAULT, the nodemask and maxnode
arguments must
be specify the empty set of nodes." [2]
So my solution is introducing a new 'default' option for attribute
mode. e.g.
<domain>
...
<numatune>
<memory mode="default" nodeset="1-2"/>
<memnode cellid="0" mode="default" nodeset="1"/>
<memnode cellid="1" mode="default" nodeset="2"/>
</numatune>
...
</domain>
If the mode is 'default', libvirt should avoid generating qemu command
line
'--object memory-backend-ram', and invokes cgroups to set cpuset.mems
for per guest numa
combining with numa topology config. Presume the numa topology is :
<cpu>
...
<numa>
<cell id='0' cpus='0-3' memory='512000' unit='KiB' />
<cell id='1' cpus='4-7' memory='512000' unit='KiB' />
</numa>
...
</cpu>
Then libvirt should set cpuset.mems to '1' for vcpus 0-3, and '2' for
vcpus 4-7.
Is this reasonable and feasible? Welcome any comments.
There are couple of problems here. The memory is not (always) allocated
by the
vCPU threads. I also remember it to not be allocated by the process,
but in KVM
in a way that was not affected by the cgroup settings.
Thanks for your reply. Maybe I don't get what you mean, could you give
me more context? But what I proposed will have no effect on other memory
allocation.
That might be
fixed now,
however.
But basically what we have against is all the reasons why we started using
QEMU's command line arguments for all that.
I'm not proposing use QEMU's command line arguments, on contrary I want
using cgroups setting to support a new config/requirement. I give a
solution about if we require default memory policy and memory numa pinning.
Thanks,
Luyao
Sorry, but I think it will more likely break rather than fix stuff.
Maybe this
could be dealt with by a switch in `qemu.conf` with a huge warning above
it.
I'm not trying to fix something, I propose how to support a new
requirement just like I stated above.
Have a nice day,
Martin
Regards,
Luyao
[1]https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/f2a1cf9180f63e88bb38ff21c169da97c3f2bad5/backends/hostmem.c#L379
[2]https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/mbind.2.html
--
2.25.1
