From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephan Diestelhorst Subject: Re: Re: IDLE domain is scheduled more than dom0 Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 19:14:06 +0100 Message-ID: <42D013EE.7060209@cam.ac.uk> References: <571ACEFD467F7749BC50E0A98C17CDD8073C8586@pdsmsx403> <200507081133.02927.habanero@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200507081133.02927.habanero@us.ibm.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: Andrew Theurer Cc: Dan Magenheimer , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Andrew Theurer schrieb: >On Friday 08 July 2005 09:53, Dan Magenheimer wrote: > > >>> Shouldn't IDLE domain not be scheduled for most time? Because >>>idle task will call into PAL for power save on XEN/IA64, the >>>performance is really, really bad to boot Dom0. The net effect is >>>about ten times slower. After adding "sched=bvt", everything back >>>to normal. >>> >>> >>If the sedf scheduler is scheduling the idle domain when >>domain0 is runnable, surely this is affecting performance >>on x86 also and is a bug that should be fixed? >> >>Has anyone done any performance testing (on x86) since >>sedf was checked in as the default? >> >> > >Just tried launching some cpu bound tasks in dom0, and I get only 75% >cpu util for dom0. I'll try the other domain scheduler and see if it >clears it up. > >-Andrew > > > cpu0: [075.3] d0-0[075.3] > cpu1: [075.3] d0-1[075.3] > cpu2: [075.3] d0-2[075.3] > cpu3: [074.8] d0-3[074.8] > > This is the current default behaviour of domain 0, it gets 75% of the CPU time and no slack time. This is easily changeable, and I guess it is usefull to do so! Stephan