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] Credit scheduler

To: Mats Petersson <mats@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Atsushi SAKAI <sakaia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Credit scheduler
From: pak333@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:21:41 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 16:20:08 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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
Thanks for the explanations. Some more questions
 
Please see my comments inline:
Thanks
Prabha
 

-------------- Original message --------------
From: Mats Petersson <mats@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> At 21:46 12/07/2007, pak333@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >Hi Atsushi
> >
> >I am still confused, so let me explain what i think should happen
> >and understand from you why it may not happen.
> >
> >I have 2 cpu intensive VMs and 1 IO intensive VM. My system has 4
> >physical cpus and 8 virtual cpus.
> >
> >Now using default parameters for the credit scheduler, the cpu
> >intersive vcpu should run for 30 millsec. It does not, it runs for
> >less (few microsecs).
> >
> >You said this could be because of softirq which are raised after a
> >system call. Can i disable the softirqs. What happens if i do? If i
> >cannot disable is there a way to see what VM is raising the softirq.
> >If the cpu-VM raises the softirq it ge ts preempted or does it
> >continue to run. How can I montior the softirqs raised by this VM.
> >Can I tell if the premption is from a softirq or from something else.
>
> I don't believe you can "disable" a softirq - you could of course
> avoid doing the call to "do_softirq", but that is most likely just
> going to completely remove any scheduling capability at all in the
> system, making the system "single-tasking". Not a recommended way, in
> my opinion.
>

Agreed

if softirq is indeed a problem, and if a cpu-intensive VM is being preempted because of a softirq, then maybe affintizing the interrupts of dom0 to a pcpu will reduce this preemption. Comments?

> >
> >Also, if the IO VM requests an IO, it will block and dom0 wakes up
> >and gets scheduled to run to service the IO. Will it preempt the cpu
> >intensive VM. If so why? Shouldn't the cpuintensiveV M get its
> >quantum of time.
> >Or does the IOVM get higher priority to preempt the cpu intensive
> >VM. How does the scheduler pick which cpu to run dom0 on ( if all
> >the vcpus running are cpu intensive)? If there is a mix of cpu-vcpus
> >and Io-vcpus, which will be the victim
>
>
> The whole idea of having separate queues for IO and CPU intensive VMs
> (or processes in a normal kernel scenario) is to allow the
> IO-intensive tasks to avoid waiting for the next time-slot when a
> CPU-hogging VM/process is running [1]. The normal behaviour for the
> scheduler is to determine dynamically if the current VM/process is IO
> or CPU intensive.
>
> Unless Dom0 is used for doing some silly CPU-intensive task
> (calculating PI with a million decimal points or compiling Xen +
> Linux kernel, for example), it will most likely look to the scheduler
> like a IO-intensive VM. So it will have the same priority as any
> other IO-intensive VM (assuming Dom0 has equal scheduler parameters
> as other guests, which I'm pretty sure is the default behaviour).
>

Does dom0 have a higher pritority than any CPU intensive VM
> If, like in your example, there are a number of processors busy with
> CPU-intensive tasks, and others with IO-intensive tasks, the most
> likely scenario is that any new IO-request will go be run on a
> "previously CPU-intensive" CPU - but on the other hand, if you have a
> lot of IO-intensive processing, there should be some processor(s)
> that are "asleep" - unless all CPU's are busy running CPU-intensive tasks...

But will it preempt a CPU intensive vcpu if no cpu is available
>
> Note that scheduling is a complex subject, and there have been dozens
> of PhD dissertations written on the subject.

Yes, but what does the Xen credit scheduler actually do
>
> [1] The idea being that if we process the IO-request that just
> completed, we can set up another IO-request, and this will get better
> IO-throughput than waiting a long time (relatively speaking 30ms is
> an eternity to the processor).

Don't understand what you mean here.


>
> --
> Mats
> >
> >As you see i have a lot of questions, so please bear with me and
> >help me understand the scheduling behavior of Xen
> >
> >Thanks
> >Prabha
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-------------- Original message --------------
> >From: Atsushi SAKAI
> >
> > > Hi Prabha
> > >
> > > Please check do_softirq in assembler.
> > > for x86
> > > call do_softirq
> > > is in.
> > >
> > > And usually do_softirq is executed at the end of system call.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Atsushi SAKAI
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > pak333@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the explanation, i am not sure i und erstood it correctly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > when does softirq get set. So when softirq is set a processor enters the
> > > scheduler every 3 micro secs? where in the source code is this
> > handled. please
> > > could you send me some pointers
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > > -Prabha
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------- Or iginal message --------------
> > > > From: Atsushi SAKAI
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,$B!!(BPrabha
> > > > >
> > > > > $B!!(B30msec is the maximum time slice.
> > > > > And I guess your 3 microsecond is the response after
> > > > > SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ is set.
> > > > > As you know,
> > > > ; > If SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ is set,
> > > > > it waits softirq calls schedule(). (this time interval is 3microsec)
> > > > >
> > > > > And I/O intensive has higher priority than CPU intensive.
> > > > > So I/O intensive job is first dispatched domain in runq.
> > > > > This is because latency improvement for I/O intensive guest.
> > > > >
> > > > > So your behavior is not strange.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Atsushi SAKAI
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > pak333@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > &g
> >t; >
> > > > > > Hi
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have noticed that VMs are typically spending 3 microsecs
> > or less before
> > > they
> > > > > are being prempted. I thought that the credit schduler time
> > slice was 30 ms.
> > > I
> > > > > have 4 VMs running and they are all cpu intensive except for
> > 1 (which is IO
> > > > > intensive) but having a VM spend max 3 micro secs before
> > being kicked out
> > > seems
> > > > > strange.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there something else going on that i am not aware of. Is
> > the time slice
> > > > > really 30 millisecs? I am using default parameters of the
> > credit scheduler.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > -Prabha
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________ _______________________
> > > Xen-devel mailing list
> > > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxx source.com
> > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>