[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D235E9D.1040603@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:53:33 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Avi Kiviti <avi@...hat.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -v3 PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function
On 01/04/2011 12:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 00:51 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> Where is the yield_to callback in the patch for RT schedule class?
>> If @p is RT, what could you do?
>
> RT guests are a pipe dream, you first need to get the hypervisor (kvm in
> this case) to be RT, which it isn't. Then you either need to very
> statically set-up the host and the guest scheduling constraints (not
> possible with RR/FIFO) or have a complete paravirt RT scheduler which
> communicates its requirements to the host.
There's a limited use case.
One host can have a few RT guests, say a host with 8 CPUs
can have up to 6 or 7 RT VCPUs. Those guests get top
priority.
The host can then have some other, low priority, guests
that scavenge remaining CPU time.
In this case, no yield_to is required for RT guests,
because they do not do overcommit.
--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists