Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Improve VM DVFS and task placement behavior

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:08:43PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:

> The only 2 pieces of information shared between host/guest are:
> 
> 1. Host CPU frequency -- this isn't really scheduler internals and
> will map nicely to a virtual cpufreq driver.
> 
> 2. A vCPU util value between 0 - 1024 where 1024 corresponds to the
> highest performance point across all CPUs (taking freq, arch, etc into
> consideration). Yes, this currently matches how the run queue util is
> tracked, but we can document the interface as "percentage of max
> performance capability", but representing it as 0 - 1024 instead of
> 0-100. That way, even if the scheduler changes how it tracks util in
> the future, we can still keep this interface between guest/host and
> map it appropriately on the host end.
> 
> In either case, we could even have a Windows guest where they might
> track vCPU utilization differently and still have this work with the
> Linux host with this interface.
> 
> Does that sound reasonable to you?

Yeah, I suppose that's managable.

Something that wasn't initially clear to me; all this hard assumes a 1:1
vCPU:CPU relation, right? Which isn't typical in virt land.