On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 07:38:11AM -0400, Laszlo Hornyak wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com> > > To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofren...@redhat.com> > > Cc: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhorn...@redhat.com>, "engine-devel" > > <engine-devel@ovirt.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:22:15 AM > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] what does engine with cpuIdle? > > > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:55:01AM -0400, Omer Frenkel wrote: > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhorn...@redhat.com> > > > > To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org> > > > > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 3:51:59 PM > > > > Subject: [Engine-devel] what does engine with cpuIdle? > > > > > > > > hi, > > > > > > > > I am trying to change a behavior in vdsm. When you pass 100% load > > > > on > > > > a VM, it will stop reporting further load and will keep telling > > > > 100% > > > > until the load drops under 100% again in it's cpuIdle > > > > information. > > > > This is totally correct if you have only single-cpu VM's, but it > > > > is > > > > false when you have multiple vcpu's, I think the cpuIdle > > > > information > > > > should not be on a 0-100 scale, but on a 0-100*vcpus scale. > > > > > > > > So I submitted this patch to vdsm: > > > > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/7892/2 > > > > and Dan pointed out that some functionality may depend on the > > > > value > > > > in the 0-100 interval. For me it seems it is ignored and the load > > > > is > > > > calculated only from sysCpu + userCpu. Does anyone build on the > > > > cpuIdle value? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Laszlo > > > > > > > > > > you are right, engine doesn't save cpuIdle for vm, > > > so it's not in use in the engine. > > > > Laszlo, in this case, I think it would be best to drop this bogus > > piece > > of information. > > Ok. > > However, before I abandon this patch:
Why abandon? I've suggested you to keep it, just make it even simpler. > we have a requirement to report cpuSys and cpuUser separately. Afaik > in libvirt cpuUser and cpuSys does not include the actual guest time > (at least not with KVM), and in this way if we only report cpuSys and > cpuUser, the sum does not give the actual load, only a relatively > little percentage of it. I am not sure I understand what you are saying, but afaik, libvirt's relatively-new http://libvirt.org/html/libvirt-libvirt.html#virDomainGetCPUStats reports the cpu time spent by the entire qemu process - in guest and host modes. > If we have the cpuIdle information in engine, > we can calculate the guest time. Therefore, should I - include the > guest time in cpuSys or cpuUser? > - add another exported field? > > And in both case, we will still have to calculate from cpuIdle because > libvirt does not tell the guest cpu time :-( Now I'm completely at loss. Why should we calculate cpuIdle per VM? Haven't we agreed that it is useless? Dan. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel