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] scheduler independent forced vcpu selection

To: Ryan Harper <ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] scheduler independent forced vcpu selection
From: Stephan Diestelhorst <sd386@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:22:23 +0100
Delivery-date: Thu, 19 May 2005 13:22:00 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050518180307.GK7305@xxxxxxxxxx>
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: <20050517204832.GH7305@xxxxxxxxxx> <428B30BC.8070602@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050518180307.GK7305@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
Ryan Harper schrieb:
> * Stephan Diestelhorst <sd386@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [2005-05-18 09:04]:
> 
>>The timer assertion might be the old scheduling timer, which gets
>>probably reset, but not deleted beforehand... And the on runqueue
>>assertion suggests that you are 'stealing' the domain from the
>>schedulers queues without giving it a chance to notice.
> 
> 
> Looking at both bvt and sedf, the runqueue is ordered by some metric or
> another (evt, deadline respectively).  What I think we need is a way to
> swap positions in the runqueues.  That is, if the lock holder is
> runnable, I want the holder to run instead of current.  Is there some
> way to do this in a scheduler independent manner with the current set of
> scheduler ops defined in sched-if.h ?

How about blocking/pausing the currently running domain? I can't think
of another way of doing this in an scheduler independent fashion...

> I noticed that neither bvt or sedf implement the rem_task function which
> I thought could be used to help out with the 'stealing' by notifying the
> schedulers that prev was going away (removing it from the runqueue) but
> just removing the exec_domain from the runqueue didn't help.

That is really nasty, and just describes what I meant with "stealing" a
domain from the scheduler! :-)

> I'm including a patch that I'm currently using so you can get a better
> idea of the modifications to schedule.c I'm making.

Thanks,
  Stephan


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