From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: Re: Re: Scheduling groups, credit scheduler support Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:35 +0000 Message-ID: <20071214164935.GL4296@implementation.uk.xensource.com> References: <20071129201959.GC12559@silverwood.ncultra.org> <20071204135020.GB10634@silverwood.ncultra.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071204135020.GB10634@silverwood.ncultra.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "Mike D. Day" Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, Mike D. Day, le Tue 04 Dec 2007 08:50:20 -0500, a écrit : > Credits are "stolen" only when the stub domain runs, so if the hvm > domain is doing no I/O then none of its credits go to the stub domain. Ok, but take for instance the case where vcpu1 of the HVM does a lot of I/O while vcpu2 of the HVM prefers to burn CPU. Here we would probably like to see the stubdomain take as much CPU time for performing the I/O as the vcpu2 has for burning. I'm not sure that your allocation permits this. Samuel