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] Re: IDLE domain is scheduled more than dom0

To: <bin.ren@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Andrew Theurer" <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: IDLE domain is scheduled more than dom0
From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 12:22:12 -0700
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 19:20:58 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcWD8C8qUyQMIkfMQJeJMJUJyfa1YgAAYryg
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: IDLE domain is scheduled more than dom0
Academically, this may not be a bug, but I think its
fair to argue that domain0 should be a special case
for using "slack" CPU time, at least by default.

Indeed, an argument could/should be made that the
whole concept of an idle domain should go away
entirely.

Dan 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bin Ren [mailto:bin.ren@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 1:07 PM
> To: Andrew Theurer
> Cc: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins); 
> xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: IDLE domain is scheduled more than dom0
> 
> I think it's quite likely that by default SEDF doesn't allow  domains
> to use slack CPU time, i.e. non  work-conserving. Each domain is given
> an absolute percentage of the total CPU time. Try use command "xm sedf
> dom-id 0 0 0 1 0" to give a domain access to slack CPU time. Hopefully
> this could restore the performance.
> 
> BTW, on my uniprocessor test machine with latest xen-unstable,
> xenlinux 2.6.11.12, domU sees significant drop in network throughputs
> (~40% less!) I'm interested in whether other people encounter similar
> situations, especially on SMP machines.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bin
> 
> On 7/8/05, Andrew Theurer <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 July 2005 11:33, Andrew Theurer wrote:
> > > On Friday 08 July 2005 09:53, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > > >   Shouldn't IDLE domain not be scheduled for most 
> time? Because
> > > > > idle task will call into PAL for power save on XEN/IA64, the
> > > > > performance is really, really bad to boot Dom0. The 
> net effect is
> > > > > about ten times slower. After adding "sched=bvt", 
> everything back
> > > > > to normal.
> > > >
> > > > If the sedf scheduler is scheduling the idle domain when
> > > > domain0 is runnable, surely this is affecting performance
> > > > on x86 also and is a bug that should be fixed?
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone done any performance testing (on x86) since
> > > > sedf was checked in as the default?
> > >
> > > Just tried launching some cpu bound tasks in dom0, and I 
> get only 75%
> > > cpu util for dom0.  I'll try the other domain scheduler 
> and see if it
> > > clears it up.
> > 
> > OK, just confirmed bvt works as expected in ia32.
> > 
> > -Andrew
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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