From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: xuehai zhang Subject: Re: sedf testing: volunteers please Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:45:50 -0500 Message-ID: <42B995BE.50402@cs.uchicago.edu> References: <428B3500.3040707@cl.cam.ac.uk> <1b0b455705062013254b58dee0@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1b0b455705062013254b58dee0@mail.gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Diwaker Gupta Cc: xen-devel , Stephan Diestelhorst List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org AFAIK, most features of BVT (proportinal CPU share based on weights especially) are included in SEDF except the time warping feature. But SEDF can also enforce abosolute CPU share for each domains via period/slice mechnism, which is similar as that in the broken atropos scheduler. This is a kind of hard guarantee which BVT can't provide. Xuehai Diwaker Gupta wrote: > On 5/18/05, Stephan Diestelhorst wrote: > >>The new sedf scheduler has been in the xen-unstable reopository for a >>couple of days now. As it may become the default scheduler soon, any >>testing now is much appreciated! > > > I'm curious (sorry if this has already been discussed on the list, I > couldn't find it in a google search). Note that I'm not defending > either BVT or SEDF, I just wanted to know the reasons for the switch > from BVT as default :) >