|   | 
      | 
  
  
      | 
      | 
  
 
     | 
    | 
  
  
     | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
      | 
  
  
    | 
         
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
 
 |   
 
 | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
    |