[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] schedulers and topology exposing questions
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 09:55:45AM +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 15:53 +0000, George Dunlap wrote: > > On 27/01/16 15:27, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > > > So Elena started looking at the CPU bound and seeing how Xen > > > behaves then > > > and if we can improve the floating situation as she saw some > > > abnormal > > > behavious. > > > > OK -- if the focus was on the two cases where the Xen credit1 > > scheduler > > (apparently) co-located two cpu-burning vcpus on sibling threads, > > then > > yeah, that's behavior we should probably try to get to the bottom of. > > > Well, let's see the trace. Hey Dario Please disregard the previous email with topology information. It was incorrect and I am attaching the topology that is actually result of Joao smt patches application. Elena > > In any case, I'm up to trying hooking the SMT load balancer in > runq_tickle (which would mean doing it upon every vcpus wakeup). > > My gut feeling is that the overhead my outwieght the benefit, and that > it will actually reveal useful only in a minority of the > cases/workloads, but it's maybe worth a try. > > Regards, > Dario > -- > <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli > Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) > Attachment:
cpuinfo Attachment:
sched_domains Attachment:
topology_smt_patches _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |