Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

[Balbir Singh]

* Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> [2009-06-05 08:21:43]:

> Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> But then there is no other way to make a *guarantee*, guarantees come
>>> at a cost of idling resources, no? Can you show me any other
>>> combination that will provide the guarantee and without idling the
>>> system for the specified guarantees?
>>>     
>>
>> OK, I see part of your concern, but I think we could do some
>> optimizations during design. For example if all groups have reached
>> their hard-limit and the system is idle, should we do start a new hard
>> limit interval and restart, so that idleness can be removed. Would
>> that be an acceptable design point?
>
> I think so.  Given guarantees G1..Gn (0 <= Gi <= 1; sum(Gi) <= 1), and a  
> cpu hog running in each group, how would the algorithm divide resources?
>

As per the matrix calculation, but as soon as we reach an idle point,
we redistribute the b/w and start a new quantum so to speak, where all
groups are charged up to their hard limits.

For your question, if there is a CPU hog running, it would be as per
the matrix calculation, since the system has no idle point during the
bandwidth period.

-- 
	Balbir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/