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/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: performance of credit2 on hybrid workload

To: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: performance of credit2 on hybrid workload
From: David Xu <davidxu06@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 20:55:16 -0400
Delivery-date: Tue, 31 May 2011 17:56:42 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=rVgHzVBizgCZ9HIC+w+sLO8CBN9myNTCobED79nZoP8=; b=kpo8DNIc9Te3cBh+0MsWQnaR0Bm3cf17+VCc0i7+YfT0ClXjV19CVwDURgH7UA/rM8 X0gmDpl9ses2WAd4GBEowa0iBtjhPXR1N91g+05HHXCtxUwM9f+5ixTw3y1rWVDcwRUK 6hyWP6/fA7eAZf31spHuiUC285Mz/pI42B1sc=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=mRvhocG8wqC6NgdrD05av13gYf5xPwQLH81hpcKBEpVjDFi/sKuLrMlGfWVIJAjTw8 spvZgNd+b/HUzVvSoWDlNRA6jPJgcpqAo+vap2uOjqkGJmY6ynID0UqCE2sdkbwAU6uQ Ax5EIxIWUuDj+oie0xzLy2RwlrayUWQdtAj3M=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1306401493.21026.8526.camel@elijah>
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: <BANLkTik9+a64cm6YPgnL0sTaXbEWCqYJcA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1306340309.21026.8524.camel@elijah> <BANLkTi=57gDitoq7-T7n9Zh0_ZrCMuxfRg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1306401493.21026.8526.camel@elijah>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I want to reduce the latency of a specific VM. How should I do based on credit scheduler? For example, I will add another parameter latency besides weight and cap, and schedule the vcpu whose VM holds the least latency firstly each time. Thanks.


2011/5/26 George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
Please reply to the list. :-)

Also, this is a question about credit1, so it should arguably be a
different thread.


On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 19:34 +0100, David Xu wrote:
> Thanks. The boost mechanism in credit can significantly reduce the
> scheduling latency for pure I/O workload. Since the minimum interval
> of credit scheduling is 10ms, the magnitude of latency for the target
> VM should be 10ms (except the credit is not used up and vcpu remain
> the head of runqueue ) as well. Why the real latency in my test (Ping
> the target VM) is much shorter than 10ms? Does the vcpu of target VM
> remain the head of runqueue if it was boosted?
> David
> 2011/5/25 George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
>         On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:15 +0100, David Xu wrote:
>         > Hi,
>         >
>         >
>         > Xen4.1 datasheet tells that credit2 scheduler is designed
>         for latency
>         > sensitive workloads. Does it have some improvement on the
>         hybrid
>         > workload including both the cpu-bound and latency-sensitive
>         i/o work?
>         > For example, if a VM runs a cpu-bound task burning the cpu
>         and a
>         > i/o-bound (latency-sensitive) task simultaneously, will the
>         latency be
>         > guaranteed? And how?
>         At the moment, the "mixed workload" problem, where a single VM
>         does both
>         cpu-intensive and latency-sensitive* workloads, has not been
>         addressed
>         yet.  I have some ideas, but I haven't implemented them yet.
>         * i/o-bound is not the same as latency sensitive.  They
>         obviously go
>         together frequently, but I would make a distinction between
>         them.  For
>         example, an scp (copy over ssh) can easily become cpu-bound if
>         there is
>         competition for the cpu -- but it is nonetheless latency
>         sensitive.  (I
>         guess to put it another way, a workload which is
>         latency-sensitive may
>         become i/o-bound if its scheduling latency is too high.)
>          -George

Xen-devel mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>