Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Scheduling groups, credit scheduler support

[Chris <hap10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Keir,

> How would the disaggregated-dom0 domains be peers in anything other  
> than a
> conceptual boxes-on-a-powerpoint-slide sense?
At the most recent Xen Summit, Derek announced work to remove domain  
builder from dom0.  Other projects removed Xenstore from dom0.  Of  
course we can also remove device drivers from dom0 (although today  
they still require some attention from dom0).  In certain  
combinations, I consider all of these decomposed components of dom0  
to be peers -- in the scheduling sense and in terms of security  
policy and management operations.
In some cases (xenstore, device driver domains, domain builder,  
etc.), service domains don't have to be slave to a single master and  
can operate in a more generic client/server model.  Further, I expect  
there to be less of a distinction between dom0 and domU components as  
decomposition progresses, so it's not fair to limit the discussion to  
existing dom0 components.
To rephrase, one part of my perspective is that a one-master/many- 
slaves model doesn't capture all of the possible relationships  
between domains.  The other part is that group information can be  
useful to parts of the VMM in addition to the scheduler.
Cheers,
Chris

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel