>
> At 2011-12-16 23:58:26,"George Dunlap" <
George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>2011/12/16 gavin <
gbtux@xxxxxxx>:
>>> At 2011-12-16 19:04:19,"George Dunlap" <
George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>2011/12/16 zhikai <
gbtux@xxxxxxx>:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> In the credit scheduler, the scheduling decision function csched_schedule()
>>>>> is called in the schedule function in scheduler.c, such as the following.
>>>>> next_slice = sched->do_schedule(sched, now, tasklet_work_scheduled);
>>>>>
>>>>> But, how often the csched_schedule() is called and to run? Does this
>>>>> frequency have something to do with the slice of credit scheduler that is
>>>>> 30ms?
>>>>
>>>>The scheduler runs whenever the SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ is raised. If you
>>>>grep through the source code fro that string, you can find all the
>>>>places where it's raised.
>>>>
>>>>Some examples include:
>>>>* When the 30ms timeslice is finished
>>>>* When a sleeping vcpu of higher priority than what's currently running wakes up
>>>>* When a vcpu blocks
>>>>* When a vcpu is migrated from one cpu to another
>>>>
>>>>30ms is actually a pretty long time; in typical workloads, vcpus block
>>>>or are preempted by other waking vcpus without using up their full
>>>>timeslice.
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for your reply.
>>>
>>> So, the vcpu is very likely to be preempted whenever the SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ is
>>> raised.
>>
>>It depends; if you have a cpu-burning vcpu running on a cpu all by
>>itself, then after its 30ms timeslice, Xen will have no one else to
>>run, and so will let it run again.
>>
>>But yes, if there are other vcpus on the runqueue, or the host is
>>moderately busy, it's likely that SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ will cause a
>>context-switch.
>>
>>> And we cannot find a small timeslice, such as a(ms), which makes the
>>> time any vcpu spending on running phase is k*a(ms), k is integer here. There
>>> is no such a small timeslice. Is it right?
>>
>>I'm sorry, I don't really understand your question. Perhaps if you
>>told me what you're trying to accomplish?
>
> I try to describe my idea as the following clearly. But I really don't know
> if it will work. Please give me some advice if possible.
>
> According to the credit scheduler in Xen, a vCPU can run a 30ms timeslice
> when it is scheduled on the physical CPU. And, a vCPU with the BOOST
> priority will preempt the running one and run additional 10ms. So, what I
> think is if we monitor the physical CPU every 10ms and we can get the
> mapping information of a physical CPU and a vCPU. And also, we can get the
> un-mapping information that a physical CPU isn’t mapped to any vCPU. Thus,
> we can get the CPU usage by calculating the proportion of the mapping
> information to the total time when we monitored.
>
> For example, if we monitor the physical CPUs every 10ms and we can get 100
> pairs of pCPU and vCPU in a second, such as (pCPU_id, vCPU_id). If there is
> 60 mapping pairs that the pCPU is mapped to a valid vPCU, and 40 un-mapping
> pairs that we cannot find the pCPU to be mapped a valid vCPU. So, we can get
> the usage of the physical CPUs that is 60%.
>
> Here, we monitor the physical CPUs every 10ms. We also can monitor them once
> less than the 10ms interval, such as 1ms interval. Whatever interval we
> choose, we must make sure no CPU content switch in the interval or the
> context switch always occur at the edge of interval. Only in this condition,
> can this idea work.
>
> So, I am not sure whether we can find such a time interval that can meet
> this condition. In other words, whether we can find such a time interval
> that ensures all the CPU content switch occur at the edge of interval.
