WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [Q] about Credit Scheduler Dom0 Scheduling policy.

To: Atsushi SAKAI <sakaia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Emmanuel Ackaouy <ack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [Q] about Credit Scheduler Dom0 Scheduling policy.
From: Atsushi SAKAI <sakaia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:35:20 +0900
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 01:36:37 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: (Your message of "Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:15:07 +0900") <200610260615.k9Q6FiKi015422@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200610181150.k9IBoP8W031962@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061018131115.GA5327@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061018132410.GA5372@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610230414.k9N4EKGJ011580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061023143210.GA26848@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610240647.k9O6lYQR004608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061025102948.GA32281@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610251303.k9PD3CpQ017617@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061025140337.GA819@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610260615.k9Q6FiKi015422@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi, Emmanuel

Sorry for mis-reading it.

The measured value to omit 2 SPIN DomU is same as w/ 2SPIN DomU.

Result 

 44
133
533
(Kbps)

And xentop says 
the CPU usage for Dom0 DomU3 is same as w/ 2 SPIN DomU
(Both Dom0 and DomU3 usages are 1.0 to 1.2 % ) 

Thanks,
Atsushi SAKAI


>The bench mark is same as previous one.
>
>Only Dom0 and DomU3 are no spinning vcpus.
>Other DomU1 and DomU2 are spinning vcpus.
>
>#pcpu(s)=1
>#vcpu(s)=2(no spinning)
>#vcpu(s)=2(spinning)
>#vcpu(s)=4(total spinning and no spinning)
>
>>
>>Out of curiosity, what are the numbers like when running this
>>benchmark with no spinning VCPUs competing?
>>
>>> With this patches, the CREDIT scheduler changed for I/O aware.
>>> (At vcpu_wake, the priority changes from UNDER to BOOST,
>>> At vcpu_acct, the priority changes from BOOST to UNDER.) 
>>> 
>>> It seems reasonable fixes!
>>> But I am afraid many I/O intensive GuestOSes are running.
>>> (I hope this prospect is needless fear.)
>>
>>I've been careful to prevent BOOSTed VCPUs from taking over the
>>system or otherwise impacting fairness:
>>
>>- Only VCPUs with positive credits can be boosted.
>>- While boosted, a VCPU is charged for any substential CPU
>>  resources consumed.
>>- VCPUs can run uninterrupted with a boosted priority for no
>>  more than 10ms (1/3-rd of a full time slice).
>>
>>Only VCPUs which consume a negligeable amount of CPU resources
>>should get real benefit from boosting. When multiple VCPUs are
>>boosted, they will round robin or be queued FIFO. The idea is
>>for a boosted VCPU to preempt spinners but not other boosted
>>I/O intensive guests. A VCPU cannot use the boosting mechanism
>>to consume more CPU than its allocated fair share.
>
>I agree.
>
>Thanks
>Atsushi SAKAI
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>







_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel