Abstract
As processor architectures have been enhancing their computing capacity by increasing core counts, independent workloads can be consolidated on a single node for the sake of high resource efficiency in data centers. With the prevalence of virtualization technology, each individual workload can be hosted on a virtual machine for strong isolation between co-located workloads. Along with this trend, hosted applications have increasingly been multithreaded to take advantage of improved hardware parallelism. Although the performance of many multithreaded applications highly depends on communication (or synchronization) latency, existing schemes of virtual machine scheduling do not explicitly coordinate virtual CPUs based on their communication behaviors.
This paper presents a demand-based coordinated scheduling scheme for consolidated virtual machines that host multithreaded workloads. To this end, we propose communication-driven scheduling that controls time-sharing in response to inter-processor interrupts (IPIs) between virtual CPUs. On the basis of in-depth analysis on the relationship between IPI communications and coordination demands, we devise IPI-driven coscheduling and delayed preemption schemes, which effectively reduce synchronization latency and unnecessary CPU consumption. In addition, we introduce a load-conscious CPU allocation policy in order to address load imbalance in heterogeneously consolidated environments. The proposed schemes are evaluated with respect to various scenarios of mixed workloads using the PARSEC multithreaded applications. In the evaluation, our scheme improves the overall performance of consolidated workloads, especially communication-intensive applications, by reducing inefficient synchronization latency.
- AMD. Amd64 architecture programmer's manual volume 2: System programming, 2010.Google Scholar
- R. H. Arpaci, A. C. Dusseau, A. M. Vahdat, L. T. Liu, T. E. Anderson, and D. A. Patterson. The interaction of parallel and sequential workloads on a network of workstations. In Proc. SIGMETRICS, 1995. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. C. Arpaci-Dusseau. Implicit coscheduling: coordinated scheduling with implicit information in distributed systems. ACM TOCS, 19 (3): 283--331, 2001. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. C. Arpaci-Dusseau, D. E. Culler, and A. M. Mainwaring. Scheduling with implicit information in distributed systems. In Proc. SIGMETRICS, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, and A. Warfield. Xen and the art of virtualization. In Proc. SOSP, 2003. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Bienia, S. Kumar, J. P. Singh, and K. Li. The PARSEC benchmark suite: characterization and architectural implications. In Proc. PACT, 2008. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Chen, H. Jin, K. Hu, and J. Huang. Scheduling overcommitted VM: Behavior monitoring and dynamic switching-frequency scaling. FGCS, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- K. J. Duda and D. R. Cheriton. Borrowed-virtual-time (BVT) scheduling: supporting latency-sensitive threads in a general-purpose scheduler. In Proc. SOSP, 1999. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. C. Dusseau, R. H. Arpaci, and D. E. Culler. Effective distributed scheduling of parallel workloads. In Proc. SIGMETRICS, 1996. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- D. Feitelson. Gang scheduling performance benefits for fine-grain synchronization. JPDC, 16 (4): 306--318, 1992.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- T. Friebel and S. Biemueller. How to deal with lock holder preemption. In Xen Summit, 2008.Google Scholar
- Intel. Intel 64 and ia-32 architectures software developer's manual. volume 3b: System programming guide, part 2, 2010.Google Scholar
- W. Jiang, Y. Zhou, Y. Cui, W. Feng, Y. Chen, Y. Shi, and Q. Wu. CFS optimizations to KVM threads on multi-core environment. In Proc. ICPADS, 2009. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Kim, H. Lim, J. Jeong, H. Jo, and J. Lee. Task-aware virtual machine scheduling for I/O performance. In Proc. VEE, 2009. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Kivity, U. Lublin, and A. Liguori. KVM: the Linux virtual machine monitor. In Proc. OLS, 2007.Google Scholar
- W. Lee, M. Frank, V. Lee, K. Mackenzie, and L. Rudolph. Implications of I/O for gang scheduled workloads. In Proc. IPPS, 1997. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Y. Lee, W. Son, S. Park, G. Lee, D. Howard, and D. Slezak. Design and implementation of a locking-aware scheduler for multiprocessor environments. Convergence and Hybrid Information Technology, 6935: 384--390, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- W. Mauerer. Professional Linux Kernel Architecture. Wrox Press Ltd., 2008. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- P. B. Menage. Adding generic process containers to the Linux kernel. In Proc. OLS, 2007.Google Scholar
- J. Ousterhout. Scheduling Techniques for Concurrent Systems. In Proc. ICDCS, 1982.Google Scholar
- M. Russinovich and D. A. Solomon. Windows Internals: Including Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista, Fifth Edition. Microsoft Press, 5th edition, 2009. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- P. Sobalvarro, S. Pakin, W. Weihl, and A. Chien. Dynamic coscheduling on workstation clusters. In Proc. IPPS, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- P. G. Sobalvarro and W. E. Weihl. Demand-based coscheduling of parallel jobs on multiprogrammed multiprocessors. In Proc. IPPS, 1995. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- O. Sukwong and H. S. Kim. Is co-scheduling too expensive for SMP VMs? In Proc. EuroSys, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- V. Uhlig, J. LeVasseur, E. Skoglund, and U. Dannowski. Towards scalable multiprocessor virtual machines. In Proc. VM, 2004. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- VMWare. VMware, Inc. VMware vSphere 4: The CPU scheduler in VMware ESX 4.1. Technical report, 2010.Google Scholar
- C. Weng, Z. Wang, M. Li, and X. Lu. The hybrid scheduling framework for virtual machine systems. In Proc. VEE, 2009. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Weng, Q. Liu, L. Yu, and M. Li. Dynamic adaptive scheduling for virtual machines. In Proc. HPDC, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Y. Wiseman and D. G. Feitelson. Paired gang scheduling. IEEE TPDS, 14 (6): 581--592, 2003. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Y. Yu, Y. Wang, H. Guo, and X. He. Hybrid co-scheduling optimizations for concurrent applications in virtualized environments. In Proc. ICNAS, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Demand-based coordinated scheduling for SMP VMs
Recommendations
Demand-based coordinated scheduling for SMP VMs
ASPLOS '13: Proceedings of the eighteenth international conference on Architectural support for programming languages and operating systemsAs processor architectures have been enhancing their computing capacity by increasing core counts, independent workloads can be consolidated on a single node for the sake of high resource efficiency in data centers. With the prevalence of virtualization ...
Is co-scheduling too expensive for SMP VMs?
EuroSys '11: Proceedings of the sixth conference on Computer systemsSymmetric multiprocessing (SMP) virtual machines (VMs) allow users to take advantage of a multiprocessor infrastructure. Despite the advantage, SMP VMs can cause synchronization latency to increase significantly, depending on task scheduling. In this ...
Demand-based coordinated scheduling for SMP VMs
ASPLOS '13As processor architectures have been enhancing their computing capacity by increasing core counts, independent workloads can be consolidated on a single node for the sake of high resource efficiency in data centers. With the prevalence of virtualization ...







Comments