On 08/12/16 11:27, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 07:12 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 07/12/16 19:29, Dario Faggioli wrote: >>> ### Phase 2 >>> >>> Inside Xen, the various schedulers will be modified to deal >>> internally with >>> the fact that vCPUs can only run on pCPUs from the class(es) they >>> are >>> associated with. This allows for more efficient implementation, and >>> paves >>> the way for enabling more intelligent logic (e.g., for minimizing >>> power >>> consumption) in *phase 3*. >>> >> Any idea how to avoid problems in the schedulers related to vcpus >> with >> different weights? >> > Sure: use Credit2! :-P > > And I'm not joking (not entirely, at least), as the alternative is to > re-engineer significantly the algorithm inside Credit, which I'm not > sure is doable or worthwhile, especially considering we have > alternatives.
So you really solved the following problem in credit2? You have three domains with 2 vcpus each and different weights. Run them on 3 physical cpus with following pinning: dom1: pcpu 1 and 2 dom2: pcpu 2 and 3 dom3: pcpu 1 and 3 How do you decide which vcpu to run on which pcpu for how long? Juergen > >> Remember, weights and pinning don't go well together, >> that was the main reason for inventing cpupools. You should at least >> name that problem. >> > Yes, that's true. I will add a paragraph about it. > > Thanks and Regards, > Dario > -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario > Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, > Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
