From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: R <19890121wr@gmail.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Improving scheduler for KVM
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 13:03:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131101110351.GF20205@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF2sySOYo5zAQWoLa5Ug_wy0a3E_0es-CaexSjoycEJXxUojgg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 02:51:28PM +0800, R wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Another quick question.
>
> Is there any benchmark that is used to measure the performance of a VM
> scheduler?
>
I am not sure what do you mean by "performance of a VM scheduler". Since
you are the one who wants to improve scheduler I would have assumed that
you know what aspects of it you are going to improve and know how to
show current inefficiency.
>
> 2013/10/30 R <19890121wr@gmail.com>:
> > Hi
> > Not only lock waiter preemption, but the scheduler may affect VMs' IO
> > throughput.
> > Experiments must be taken to figure out the reason.
> >
> > I am trying to use preempt_notifier and vmexit handler to build a more
> > efficient scheduler.
> > Something like priority boosting.
> >
> > 2013/10/29 Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>:
> >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:20:37AM +0800, R wrote:
> >>> Hi, everyone
> >>>
> >>> I am a graduate student. And now I have some spare time.
> >>> I notice that KVM uses kernel scheduler to schedule VCPUs.
> >>> But there exists many problem beyond the capability of current
> >>> scheduler. (e.g. Lock Waiter Preemption problem)
> >>>
> >>> And I don't want to reinvent the wheel. So I want to implement a
> >>> module which can be used by the scheduler to schedule VCPUs more
> >>> efficient.
> >>>
> >>> Is there any documentation about any problem that I should pay attention to?
> >>> Any comment is welcome.
> >>>
> >> If you are thinking about gang scheduler it was done before, but it will
> >> never be accepted upstream. And IIRC pvticketlock result was close if
> >> not better than gang scheduling. If you are thinking about something
> >> else then implement it in Linux scheduler directly. Linux scheduler is
> >> not pluggable, so you cannot change it from a module.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gleb.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Rui Wu
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Rui Wu
--
Gleb.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-01 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-29 2:20 Improving scheduler for KVM R
2013-10-29 7:16 ` Raghavendra KT
2013-10-29 7:51 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-30 5:24 ` R
2013-11-01 6:51 ` R
2013-11-01 11:03 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
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=20131101110351.GF20205@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=19890121wr@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).