From: Stephan Diestelhorst <sd386@cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: scheduler independent forced vcpu selection
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:22:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <428C930F.6060907@cl.cam.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050518180307.GK7305@us.ibm.com>
Ryan Harper schrieb:
> * Stephan Diestelhorst <sd386@cl.cam.ac.uk> [2005-05-18 09:04]:
>
>>The timer assertion might be the old scheduling timer, which gets
>>probably reset, but not deleted beforehand... And the on runqueue
>>assertion suggests that you are 'stealing' the domain from the
>>schedulers queues without giving it a chance to notice.
>
>
> Looking at both bvt and sedf, the runqueue is ordered by some metric or
> another (evt, deadline respectively). What I think we need is a way to
> swap positions in the runqueues. That is, if the lock holder is
> runnable, I want the holder to run instead of current. Is there some
> way to do this in a scheduler independent manner with the current set of
> scheduler ops defined in sched-if.h ?
How about blocking/pausing the currently running domain? I can't think
of another way of doing this in an scheduler independent fashion...
> I noticed that neither bvt or sedf implement the rem_task function which
> I thought could be used to help out with the 'stealing' by notifying the
> schedulers that prev was going away (removing it from the runqueue) but
> just removing the exec_domain from the runqueue didn't help.
That is really nasty, and just describes what I meant with "stealing" a
domain from the scheduler! :-)
> I'm including a patch that I'm currently using so you can get a better
> idea of the modifications to schedule.c I'm making.
Thanks,
Stephan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-19 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-17 20:48 scheduler independent forced vcpu selection Ryan Harper
2005-05-18 12:10 ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2005-05-18 14:55 ` Ryan Harper
2005-05-18 18:03 ` Ryan Harper
2005-05-19 13:22 ` Stephan Diestelhorst [this message]
2005-05-18 22:37 ` Ryan Harper
2005-05-19 13:25 ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2005-05-19 14:55 ` Ryan Harper
2005-05-19 15:05 ` Ryan Harper
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=428C930F.6060907@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--to=sd386@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=ryanh@us.ibm.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.