|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Align periodic vpts
|
To: |
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, 'Keir Fraser' <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Align periodic vpts |
|
From: |
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:00:26 +0800 |
|
Accept-language: |
en-US |
|
Acceptlanguage: |
en-US |
|
Cc: |
|
|
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 11 Feb 2009 04:01:12 -0800 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<0A882F4D99BBF6449D58E61AAFD7EDD606C4EBD1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<8FED46E8A9CA574792FC7AACAC38FE7701CB087ADD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C5B8680D.290B%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <0A882F4D99BBF6449D58E61AAFD7EDD606C4EBD1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Thread-index: |
AcmMOKb7clHaVWfpTWKVxXzVWUXrbAAA+rheAAAN2YAAALAdcA== |
|
Thread-topic: |
[PATCH] Align periodic vpts |
>From: Tian, Kevin
>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:48 PM
>
>>From: Keir Fraser
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:34 PM
>>
>>On 11/02/2009 11:05, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Aligned periodic vpts can improve the HVM guest power
>>consumption a lot,
>>> especially while the guest using high HZ such as 1000HZ.
>>> This patch aligns all periodic vpts except vlapic to the
>>period bound. For
>>> vlapic, only make it aligned while using the new option
>>"align_periodic_vpt".
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Gang <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>Also, Intel already contributed code to merge up timers. It's the
>>expiry-range patch in common/timer.c. This could be used by
>>vpt.c to add a
>>per-domain acceptable range on vpt expiries. High-frequency
>>timers would
>>then naturally fire together. Having a per-domain config
>>option for this
>>would be something that would actually seem more generically
>>useful (could
>>be used perhaps for other timers beyond vpt.c even).
>>
>>This seems to me a more intuitive and gracefully
>>selectable/de-selectable
>>alternative to this proposed patch, which really looks like a
>hardcoded
>>hack.
>>
>
>nice idea. But one quick think in my mind leads to one issue. Now
>Xen timer doesn't differentiate single-shot or periodic timer.
>Then such
>per-domain range option could also impact single-shot timer servicing
>same domain... Of course current global slop option has same effect.
>But it'd be better to mitigate the side effect on single-shot
>timer. Is it
>feasible to add a new set_timer_range interface for explicit
>invocation,
>e.g. by vpt, while still keeping original global slop option
>applying to all?
>
Think it more, I think that Jimmy's patch is simpler and more
accurate for the purpose. It's just a one-time adjustment for
periodical timer, and no harm to single-shot timer. It can be
enabled by default, while per-domain range has side-effect
unless adding more code to differentiate timers which is not
worthy.
Of course per-domain switch is still required to disable it as
your previous comment, for old guest.
Thanks,
Kevin
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home