|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-users] Does Xen's Dom0 hypervisor based cpufreq support 'schedutil' governor?
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016, at 11:55 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> As far as I understand it, they are independent of the Domain-0 cpufreq
> governors (or if they aren't, then Linux and NetBSD have identical
> behavior in their CPU frequency governors, which would not surprise me
> all that much).
>
> Assuming that's the case, 'ondemand' is the closest to 'schedutil', as
> schedutil in Linux is just a smarter version of the ondemand governor.
> Ondemand takes only the processor utilization and the current frequency
> into account, while schedutil also factors in a bunch of other things.
>
> I'm not a Xen developer myself, but based on my very limited knowledge
> of the internals of Xen and my marginally greater knowledge of the
> internals of Linux, I'd say it's not likely that a governor equivalent
> to schedutil is even possible on Xen without all the domains
> co-operating (a lot of the stats that schedutil looks at are derived
> from parts of the process state which would translate to guest kernel
> internal state in the context of Xen).
In Dom0, with cpufreq=xen set (i.e. hypervisor based cpufreq in use) it looks
like 'ondemand' is the default
xenpm get-cpufreq-para all | egrep "scaling_driver|current"
scaling_driver : acpi-cpufreq
current_governor : ondemand
scaling_driver : acpi-cpufreq
current_governor : ondemand
scaling_driver : acpi-cpufreq
current_governor : ondemand
scaling_driver : acpi-cpufreq
current_governor : ondemand
Notice that the scaling driver is apci-cpufreq -- which is the same as what the
kernel would use in a non-Xen env.
It'd be nice to find an up to date, authoritative doc on this. It's pretty
confusing .
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-users
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |