Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Bharata B Rao wrote:
So the groups with guarantees get a priority boost. That's not a good side effect.

That happens only in the presence of idle cycles when other groups [with or
without guarantees] have nothing useful to do. So how would that matter
since there is nothing else to run anyway ?

If there are three groups, each running a cpu hog, and they have (say) guarantees of 10%, 10%, and 0%, then they should each get 33% of the cpu, not biased towards the groups with the guarantee.

If I want to change the weights, I'll alter their priority.

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux