From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Performance guarantees Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:58:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87hcb9tzwe.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> References: <1306.10.9.1.37.1214898552.squirrel@www.cse.iitb.ac.in> <1344.10.9.1.37.1214898905.squirrel@www.cse.iitb.ac.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: "Sukanto Ghosh" Return-path: Received: from smtp-out04.alice-dsl.net ([88.44.63.6]:47930 "EHLO smtp-out04.alice-dsl.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754202AbYGAO7L (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 10:59:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1344.10.9.1.37.1214898905.squirrel@www.cse.iitb.ac.in> (Sukanto Ghosh's message of "Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:25:05 +0530 (IST)") Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: "Sukanto Ghosh" writes: > > By Performance guarantees I mean, > i) certain %age of CPU time > ii) certain %age of memory dedicated to each guest > iii) anything else ? The beauty of KVM is that there's no need to actually implement this for KVM. It can just use all the infrastructure of standard Linux that is available for this. The hierarchical group scheduler and "memory cgroup" work that is being worked on in recent kernels should be able to do i) and ii). Partly it could be also done using older technology like cpusets or numa emulation or nice levels. -Andi