Re: [Xen-devel] Should we mark RTDS as supported feature from experimental feature?

[Meng Xu <xumengpanda@xxxxxxxxx>]

>
>> > 4. A work-conserving mode
>> I think we need to consider the item 4 carefully. Work-conserving
>> mode
>> is not a must for real-time schedulers and it is not the main
>> purpose/goal of the RTDS scheduler.
>>
> It's indeed not a must for real-time schedulers. In fact, it's only
> important if one wants the system to be overall usable, when using a
> real-time scheduler. :-P
>
> Also, I may be wrong but it should not be too hard to implement...
> I.e., a win-win. :-)

I'm thinking if we want to implement work-conserving policy in RTDS,
how should we allocate the unused resource to domains. Should this
allocation be promotional to the budget/period each domain is
configured with?
I guess the complexity totally depends on which work-conserving
algorithm we want to encode into RTDS.

For example, we can have priority bands that when a VCPU depletes its
budget, it will goes to the lower priority band. The VCPU on a lower
priority band will not be scheduled until all VCPUs in a higher
priority band are scheduled.
This policy seems easy to incorporate into the RTDS. (But I have to
think harder to make sure there is not catch.... :-) )

Best,

Meng

-----------
Meng Xu
PhD Student in Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~mengxu/

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel