From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: Performance difference between Xen versions Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 09:15:15 +0100 Message-ID: <4DBE8433020000780003F1DF@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4DBE41C9.1010409@ts.fujitsu.com> <4DBE7819020000780003F1B6@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4DBE64A6.2080602@ts.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4DBE64A6.2080602@ts.fujitsu.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Juergen Gross Cc: Keir Fraser , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 02.05.11 at 10:00, Juergen Gross = wrote: > On the long run I'd like to make the cpufreq governor a feature of the > cpupool. This would enable an administrator of a large Xen machine > with a heterogeneous load to specify which domains should run at > full speed and which are allowed to save energy at the cost of latency. >=20 > What do you think? Certainly an interesting idea, with the question of how an implementation of this would look like. Jan