On 09/27/2017 08:01 AM, Blair Bethwaite wrote:
On 27 September 2017 at 23:19, Jakub Jursa email@example.com wrote:
'hw:cpupolicy=dedicated' (while NOT setting 'hw:numanodes') results in
libvirt pinning CPU in 'strict' memory mode
(from libvirt xml for given instance)
So yeah, the instance is not able to allocate memory from another NUMA node.
I can't recall what the docs say on this but I wouldn't be surprised
if that was a bug. Though I do think most users would want CPU & NUMA
pinning together (you haven't shared your use case but perhaps you do
Not a bug. Once you enable CPU pinning we assume you care about performance,
and for max performance you need NUMA affinity as well. (And hugepages are
I'm not quite sure what do you mean by 'memory will be locked for the
guest'. Also, aren't huge pages enabled in kernel by default?
I think that suggestion was probably referring to static hugepages,
which can be reserved (per NUMA node) at boot and then (assuming your
host is configured correctly) QEMU will be able to back guest RAM with
One nice thing about static hugepages is that you pre-allocate them at startup,
so you can decide on a per-NUMA-node basis how much 4K memory you want to leave
for incidental host stuff and qemu overhead. This lets you specify different
amounts of "host-reserved" memory on different NUMA nodes.
In order to use static hugepages for the guest you need to explicitly ask for a
page size of 2MB. (1GB is possible as well but in most cases doesn't buy you
much compared to 2MB.)
Lastly, qemu has overhead that varies depending on what you're doing in the
guest. In particular, there are various IO queues that can consume significant
amounts of memory. The company that I work for put in a good bit of effort
engineering things so that they work more reliably, and part of that was
determining how much memory to reserve for the host.