On 12/12/2014 17:10, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Ok, this looks specific enough that an out-of-band solution within DPDK
> > sounds like the best approach. It seems unnecessary to involve the
> > hypervisor (neither KVM nor QEMU).
>
> Paolo, I don't understand why you don't imagine controlling fr
2014-12-12 15:50, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 12/12/2014 14:00, Carew, Alan wrote:
> > The problem is deterministic control of host CPU frequency and the DPDK
> > usage
> > model.
> > A hands-off power governor will scale based on workload, whether this is a
> > host
> > application or VM, so no problems
On 12/12/2014 14:00, Carew, Alan wrote:
> The problem is deterministic control of host CPU frequency and the DPDK usage
> model.
> A hands-off power governor will scale based on workload, whether this is a
> host
> application or VM, so no problems or bug there.
>
> Where this solution fits is
Hi Paolo,
> 2014-12-09 18:35, Paolo Bonzini:
> > Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
> > We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same
> goal.
> > I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with
> > their plan.
> > Remember that
2014-12-09 18:35, Paolo Bonzini:
> Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
> We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same goal.
> I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with their
> plan.
> Remember that we already had this probl
I had replied to this message, but my reply never got to the list.
Let's try again.
I wonder if this might be papering over a bug in the host cpufreq
driver. If the guest is not doing much and leaving a lot of idle CPU
time, the host should scale down the frequency of that CPU. In the case
of pi
Tim,
cc-ing Paolo and qemu-devel@ again in order to get their take on it.
>>> Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
>>> We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same goal.
>>> I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with their plan.
>>> Remember that w
.
-Original Message-
From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of O'driscoll, Tim
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 10:54 AM
To: Carew, Alan; Thomas Monjalon
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/10] VM Power Management
> From: Carew, Alan
>
> >
> From: Carew, Alan
>
> > Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
> > We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same goal.
> > I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with their plan.
> > Remember that we already had this problem with ivshmem which was
> >
Hi Thomas,
> Hi Alan,
>
> Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
> We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same goal.
> I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with their plan.
> Remember that we already had this problem with ivshmem which was
> planne
Hi Alan,
Did you make any progress in Qemu/KVM community?
We need to be sync'ed up with them to be sure we share the same goal.
I want also to avoid using a solution which doesn't fit with their plan.
Remember that we already had this problem with ivshmem which was planned
to be dropped.
Thanks
-
Hi Thomas,
> > However with a DPDK solution it would be possible to re-use the message bus
> > to pass information like device stats, application state, D-state requests
> > etc. to the host and allow for management layer(e.g. OpenStack) to make
> > informed decisions.
>
> I think that management
2014-10-14 12:37, Carew, Alan:
> > > The following patches add two DPDK sample applications and an alternate
> > > implementation of librte_power for use in virtualized environments.
> > > The idea is to provide librte_power functionality from within a VM to
> > > address
> > > the lack of MSRs to
Hi Thomas,
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 9:26 PM
> To: Carew, Alan
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/10] VM Power Management
>
> Hi Alan,
>
>
Hi Alan,
2014-10-12 20:36, Alan Carew:
> The following patches add two DPDK sample applications and an alternate
> implementation of librte_power for use in virtualized environments.
> The idea is to provide librte_power functionality from within a VM to address
> the lack of MSRs to facilitate fr
Patch name: VM Power Management
Brief description: Verify VM power management in virtualized environments
Test Flag: Tested-by
Tester name:yong.liu at intel.com
Test environment:
OS: Fedora20 3.11.10-301.fc20.x86_64
Virtual Machine Power Management.
The following patches add two DPDK sample applications and an alternate
implementation of librte_power for use in virtualized environments.
The idea is to provide librte_power functionality from within a VM to address
the lack of MSRs to facilitate frequency chang
17 matches
Mail list logo
