lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
>>>I did this to the scheduler last year - see
>>> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111404726721747&w=2
>>
>>It's really interesting!
>>Have you tested fairness of your solution and it's performance overhead?
>
>
> What do you mean by fairness, exactly?
I mean how CPU time is distributed not only in the case of CPU hogs. For
example, when 2 tasks do cyclic 1 byte transfer via pipe. one of them is
awake, while another goes to sleep.
If both are in one container, will they behave like a CPU hog?

> As for its overhead, I just got it working inside UML. I tried it on
> x86_64, but something was wrong with the low-level switching stuff,
> and the machine hung whenever a guest scheduler process tried to run.
> So, I never got any real measurements.
It's a pity... :( We have fair CPU scheduler in OpenVZ project, so it's
quite an interesting approach for us.

Kirill

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-09 16:49    [W:1.396 / U:0.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site