[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D2E88EA.3050604@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:08:58 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Avi Kiviti <avi@...hat.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -v3 PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function
On 01/12/2011 10:26 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 22:02 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
>> Cgroups only makes the matter worse - libvirt places
>> each KVM guest into its own cgroup, so a VCPU will
>> generally always be alone on its own per-cgroup, per-cpu
>> runqueue! That can lead to pulling a VCPU onto our local
>> CPU because we think we are alone, when in reality we
>> share the CPU with others...
>
> How can that happen? If the task you're trying to accelerate isn't in
> your task group, the whole attempt should be a noop.
Nono, all the VCPUs from the same guest are in the same
cgroup. However, with 4 VCPUs and 4 physical CPUs,
chances are that they're all alone on their own per-cpu,
per-cgroup cfs_rq.
However, each CPU might have other runnable processes in
other cfs_rq sched entities.
--
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