WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Xen

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]

[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC][Patch] Improvemet the responce of xend.

To: <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC][Patch] Improvemet the responce of xend.
From: Peter Teoh <htmldeveloper@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2007年8月31日 14:37:24 +0800
Delivery-date: 2007年9月13日 05:26:38 -0700
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:to:subject:date:mime-version:content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole:from; b=L3b9JY91sgd9Qmrbrq/gCWLcrN4ochzcxiy8bj2OhhtM5H3eOPkdG2QOdC0bJ+tMe5Wq8KoxnWQEVsOTygHBzlHNLvGufoIxY1aaLKfQ+j0mLdUEDgkOwkGrXJT/8HEhGCCDGOAmZDAABqoHvrbGXqOF3bmvy86sOhJkMaha8Do=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:to:subject:date:mime-version:content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole:from; b=NtVw5lq83+0eSgHL8fWEzd7TJDoEKEIZ1FgGoqsmGtQIG2cjNrsmithNwGkdu37MNqLn4jGW9+Dh9sXAtSQ363VKS3YX5u2smos8ILLHMp3fPEvIlLOmCkKp+1FwNttrJi3a0oadrzJowfw65q4+b8+o1DHRxieTPKlNKl+A8aE=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
A few comments:
a. The patch basically spawn a new process to handle the additional "xm" inputs asynchronously. Correct? And since currently this is not possible, it also means that the possibilities of deadlocks or race conditions through concurrent access to xend via different xm users is not thoroughly verified. Correct? May be. So this is something to look out for.
b. The performance of dump core is slow, mainly because external hard disk are slow. Therefore, there could be four different options/variations: minidump vs full-dump. For each there could be a compressed vs no-compression option - compressed is to get a smaller physical core.
c. Furthermore, there could be an additional throttling parameters to specify how much to slow the coredump operation, for example, by forcing a CPU re-scheduling operation (higher overheads in task switching - tradeoff for responsiveness) after every fix number of blocks. This will also have the effect of improving performance for additional domU's operation.
Thank you very much.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date: [Xen-devel] pthread_mutex_lock() and Xenstored , Peter Teoh
Next by Date: [Xen-devel] dom0 vs non-dom0 differentiation inside Xen hypervisor , Peter Teoh
Previous by Thread: [Xen-devel] pthread_mutex_lock() and Xenstored , Peter Teoh
Next by Thread: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC][Patch] Improvemet the responce of xend. , Akio Takebe
Indexes: [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

Copyright ©, Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy
Citrix This site is hosted by Citrix

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /