From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: NISHIGUCHI Naoki Subject: Re: RE: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Modification of credit scheduler rev2 Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:19:15 +0900 Message-ID: <496EC753.1070805@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <4949BC2C.4060302@jp.fujitsu.com> <496E99B9.3010906@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "Su, Disheng" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" Cc: George Dunlap , "sakaia@jp.fujitsu.com" , "aviv@neocleus.com" , "Ian.Pratt@eu.citrix.com" , "keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Su, Disheng wrote: > NISHIGUCHI Naoki wrote: >>> c. the limitation of weight for guest B. I have to set the weight >>> of guest B to 10. It may not be reasonable in real usage case. >> Is copying large files in background on guest A indispensable? >> In my test, guest A runs only video playing. >> I think that my approach couldn't solve this issue. > > You know, guest A is the primary guest to end user, so we can't make any assumption about the user's operation in guest A, which is the big challenge for client virtualization IMO. > Weight, Cap, Boost credit, are all can be used together, or adding new mechanism, such as static priority as Kevin said, to solve the problem. I see. That is really the big challenge. I think we should experiment in various configuration and clarify some problems. >>> Do you have the experience with audio? I don't know I have properly >>> configured your scheduler or not. Hope the your scheduler can solve >>> the audio issues also. >> Sorry, I don't have the experience with audio. >> But I'll try to reproduce your configuration and investigate. >> > > Glad to see you have interest with audio also. Any problem when you reproduce the audio issues, pls let me know. Thanks. Regards, Naoki