 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-users
[Xen-users] Re: Why CPU intensive domain gets 60ms time slice?
| To: | xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-users] Re: Why CPU intensive domain gets 60ms time slice? |
| From: | Thawan Kooburat <kthawan@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 3 Mar 2011 20:26:12 -0600 |
| Delivery-date: | Thu, 03 Mar 2011 18:27:31 -0800 |
| 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=3b9EWKlJoA8fjOtdb4oz5t5dz0Tbam1SiEdjmQWIkmc=; b=Plxy+c7PoBYn9cKO5mq0Cj5tVLSrQOKHRxDoQmzz2A3Yky4d9O1QghkdIIW1XIxggE NinIPQqzc5PaeBO3dpi9+g9SYar6I1ZZVqH+A5+hbyAeU46dicQPe9HHifL2YzOFgj+Z wcj8Cf9ZXQLFbsp2rrrdXhA2Um9F4EutWnE3U= |
| 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=pjq83QglHcS/Nij62GEeILZMDpiMK1Q41wp6KibG5gMo1e0CI89Radxpve2Z5Nxb57 nMYB9He0hHAc8/gFUuByHf76yVP7ROJYCwq+05Ad8xcHyphHnejXq9ud3p1tSpXBtle5 5xmSRKkgnpB7HYhZXgaK1zavObazRuhUY1HPI= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <AANLkTi=8tP=j_X0sFG6DveBhGFs7j5+p96zi43UT8r0J@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| References: | <AANLkTi=8tP=j_X0sFG6DveBhGFs7j5+p96zi43UT8r0J@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Found the reason, I added TRC_SCHED_CONTINUE_RUNNING into the formats used to print the log. Now, it made more sense. CPU2 1663536439522 (+149622930) switch_infprev [ old_domid = 0x00007fff, runtime = 60006279 ] CPU2 1663536440024 (+ 502) switch_infnext [ new_domid = 0x00000001, time = 1100, r_time = 30000000 ] CPU2 1663536440557 (+ 533) __enter_scheduler [ prev<domid:edomid> = 0x00007fff : 0x00000002, next<domid:edomid> = 0x00000001 : 0x00000000 ] CPU2 1663536441067 (+ 510) running_to_runnable [ dom:vcpu = 0x7fff0002 ] CPU2 1663536441809 (+ 742) runnable_to_running [ dom:vcpu = 0x00010000 ] CPU2 0 (+ 0) cpu_change 0x00000002 CPU2 1663611251009 (+74809200) continue_running [ vcpu:dom = 0x00010000 ] CPU2 1663685986987 (+74735978) continue_running [ vcpu:dom = 0x00010000 ] CPU2 1663685997997 (+ 11010) switch_infprev [ old_domid = 0x00000001, runtime = 60007641 ] CPU2 1663685998590 (+ 593) switch_infnext [ new_domid = 0x00007fff, time = 60007641, r_time = 4294967295 ] -- Thawan Kooburat Graduate Student Department of Computer Science UW-Madison _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Xen-users] Why CPU intensive domain gets 60ms time slice?, Thawan Kooburat |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Xen-users] local storage caching xen cloud 1.0, Martin Smith |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-users] Why CPU intensive domain gets 60ms time slice?, Thawan Kooburat |
| Next by Thread: | [Xen-users] local storage caching xen cloud 1.0, Martin Smith |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
