|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [0/3] DomGrp/SchedGrp Merge RFC
To: |
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] [0/3] DomGrp/SchedGrp Merge RFC |
From: |
Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:27:23 +0000 |
Cc: |
Chris <hap10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mike D. Day" <ncmike@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:28:33 -0800 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<C3CF2C73.1C02C%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
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> |
Mail-followup-to: |
Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chris <hap10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mike D. Day" <ncmike@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
References: |
<0AACAAE6-C2F5-44AE-AB0B-455D25DF132C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C3CF2C73.1C02C%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 |
Keir Fraser, le Wed 06 Feb 2008 09:20:51 +0000, a écrit :
> On 5/2/08 22:20, "Chris" <hap10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On the issue of code size, take Mike's schedgrps for example, which
> > was very small as originally posted. After integration with domgrps,
> > it shrank to less than 40% of its original size (259 insertions down
> > from 681) and it no longer induced a domain hierarchy.
>
> If credit-sharing is made configurable (as you would surely want it to be if
> domgrps are to have other uses) then a reasonable number of those lines of
> code will reappear, and spread across tools and hypervisor.
>
> > But it sounds like the main objection is lack of existing use cases.
> > They're coming... slowly. The best I can say is that I'm working to
> > identify and mitigate future challenges before they cause problems.
> > Is there critical mass for a generic group architecture yet? I think
> > so, but the case should only get stronger with time.
>
> I'm driven by concrete use cases. Several of the upcoming uses you mention
> need careful consideration of what they are useful for, to determine the
> best way to design them into the system. Take resource sharing. Stub domains
> sharing scheduler credits with the HVM guest is a rather special case, and
> one where a master/slave relationship is not unreasonable (and hence in this
> case I think it is arguable whether it is actually a good fit with domgrps
> after all).
Actually, in my former research team in Bordeaux, they would like to
write a small domain that computes the scheduling of a bunch of others,
for parallel scientific computing.
Samuel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
|
|