From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: RT-Xen on ARM Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:42:57 +0200 Message-ID: <1499244177.7486.7.camel@citrix.com> References: <88185ae6-d1cf-898c-fe18-a569b0049230@epam.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1867454685481860165==" Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dSftu-0005pV-0I for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 08:43:10 +0000 In-Reply-To: <88185ae6-d1cf-898c-fe18-a569b0049230@epam.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Sender: "Xen-devel" To: Andrii Anisov , Meng Xu Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============1867454685481860165== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-GOr2hCFI6zHEVKvIuukb" --=-GOr2hCFI6zHEVKvIuukb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 15:28 +0300, Andrii Anisov wrote: > On 03.07.17 21:42, Meng Xu wrote: > >=20 > > The RTDS uses the EDF scheduling, under which the priorities of the > > VCPUs (or VMs) are dynamically changed based on their (absolute) > > deadlines. This provides better real-time performance for the > > *overall* system. >=20 > In case we would have a driver domain and IC domain would draw to pv=C2= =A0 > display baked by backend in a driver domain. Driver domain should be > RT=C2=A0 > capable as well. > So it seems two domains should be RT beside non-RT IVI domain. >=20 Currently (and this is not changing anytime soon), the only way of using different schedulers for different domains is by means of cpupools. I.e., you create, for instance, an RTDS pool, and a Credit or Credit2 pool. In the RTDS pool, you put the RT domains, so the IC domain and the driver domains, and you subdivide resources between them according to the utilization and latency requirements that each one of them has. You then put all the non-RT domains in the other pool, and you control their behavior via weighs, cap, pinning (etc). Of course, this is just an example, and whether or not it is the best way of going, as well as the specific parameters, really depends on the characteristics of your platform and of your workload. Trying to reason on as detailed as possible scenario, and then actually testing and benchmarking every envisioned solution, is the only way to actually tell what will work best. As I said in the other email, I'm more than up discussing this, either via email or in person (e.g., at the Summit). Regards, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-GOr2hCFI6zHEVKvIuukb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCAAGBQJZXKaRAAoJEBZCeImluHPuudEQAJOWQgXXEZatSGTzxe95IPfA ygAAPtNqlDYz1djvJBlw8yEdFdFENvmex0sV+uh4seuiRExuALpOskDKwHOsjEIM a8dg7ervlIQ5FO1BDknvohCV62KzU556D1Oko4eLyb//Oc5RRj5lp28iEF5PeCXr RU/znIM2t+vV8bmpF2N+3vjk4PbGGGDwCKtK3+RfpyLCxSHcvZm4P2NOKpS5xKzG fxH0GzJmh0H/bQG/la2ZTNoPVFoQMWpJwCYhxQ6fJcbUFTfYsYHyVj857Seihr3+ COKelbp/2GVovH4B01yTU5n7trndecW/Onlm3AvxFFjpF+9N/AQIQT+uGrxdZyV9 ddm6dwdQS527hhrNoQVxKkr1288iJ2gqxn84kayrq/2gdLzel7sH1kIOM5+dNutK dffYmuLTpKWxFRhuYD04uUE/5HGeHqi/QOnlH5RujwKQuUrIt8z/JQJ4/HePpO7+ ETmoc6JKpKM0zxuIQN+AVtXshauM/PgqVvpZ3XIYMft7RoaVK2JP0Tyl0UAxl4ZV JhoO9gdpwNAT7VA8s0ksRRjYSHusxmkmJP+wMt1rqnWUG5CXOg1B8uPFqyhlisvu nuUM2qTVBnhnnheItUAhPoV6UT3hAUYMBG11yGmI1iH9yMTkjZi6Wj2ZTo8PJjcb kMpCkhY5Ze7VXEK8XEnG =yiJH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-GOr2hCFI6zHEVKvIuukb-- --===============1867454685481860165== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVuLm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLnhlbi5v cmcveGVuLWRldmVsCg== --===============1867454685481860165==--