On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 14:11 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:52:16PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
I looked at doing that once but was told that I was changing the
interface in an unacceptable way,
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 23:30 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 23:30 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Makes sense?
Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to hard
capping is (probably easier inside the scheduler, where run_delay is
calculated).
Reporting the hard capping to the guest is a good
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Makes sense?
Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to hard
capping is (probably easier inside the scheduler, where run_delay is
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 04:34:16PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Makes sense?
Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to hard
capping
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:54:37PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 04:34:16PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Makes sense?
Not sure
On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic
2013/2/19 Marcelo Tosatti mtosa...@redhat.com:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
2013/3/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 12:13 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 14:34 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/3/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100,
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 12:13 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:52:16PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
I looked at doing that once but was told that I was changing the
interface in an unacceptable way, because now I was not reporting all of
the elapsed time. I agree
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
In the case of where you have a system that
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
being reported in accounting tools such as top or vmstat. This can
cause confusion for the end user.
Sorry, I'm no expert
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
being reported in accounting tools such as top or
In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
being reported in accounting tools such as top or vmstat. This can
cause confusion for the end user. To ease the confusion this patch set
adds the idea of consigned
21 matches
Mail list logo
