From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: Is guest OS oriented scheduling welcome? Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:34:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20090422123420.GB14705@redhat.com> References: <1060494.867561240402736300.JavaMail.coremail@app167.163.com> <49EF0C1E.2060203@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ????????? , kvm@vger.kernel.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:34600 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754013AbZDVMen (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:34:43 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49EF0C1E.2060203@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:22:54PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > ????????? wrote: > >Hello folks, > >In the past, it was said KVM would like to treat the guest OS threads > >differently in scheduling. However, till now, the qemu thread is regarded > >as a conventional user thread. Therefore, it is hard to control how much > >CPU slices one guest OS can utilize. I don't think a computing cloud > >provider likes this idea. Although the standard scheduler tunables are per thread, it is possible to put each QEMU process into a separate CGroup, and use the cpu_shares tunable to control scheduling priority of the guest as a whole, instead of individual threads. Not sure it this is sufficient for what you want, but it is one possible option for guest scheduling.. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|