arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1707.05405

Study and Analysis of MAC/IPAD Lab Configuration

Ayman Noor
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper is about three virtualization modes: VMware, Parallels, and Boot Camping. The trade off of their testing is the hardware requirements. The main question is, among the three, which is the most suitable? The answer actually varies from user to user. It depends on the user needs. Moreover, it is necessary to consider its performance, graphics, efficiency and reliability, and interoperability, and that is our major scope. In order to take the final decision in choosing one of the modes it is important to run some tests, which costs a lot in terms of money, complexity, and time consumption. Therefore, in order to overcome this trade off, most of the research has been done through online benchmarking and my own anticipation. The final solution was extracted after comparing all previously mentioned above and after rigorous testing made which will be introduced later in this document.

Explore related subjects

cs.OScs.PF

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ayman Noor. 2017-07-17. Study and Analysis of MAC/IPAD Lab Configuration. https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.05405

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Grouper: Scheduling Groups for Multi-Tenant Microsecond-Scale Microservices

Microsecond-scale core allocation makes colocating latency-critical services with batch work worthwhile. A thread that finds no work parks within microseconds and its core goes to a batch task. Putting one back costs $\sim$18 $μ$s, as the allocator must discover that a core is wanted and then take it from the batch task holding it. A monolith pays that tax once per request, a microservice chain pays it at every hop in both directions, and a multi-tenant host multiplies it again, because every tenant's hops queue at the same allocator. On our port of DeathStarBench's hotelReservation, going from two tenants to ten takes a hop from 39 to 222 $μ$s and a 10-RPC path's median from 456 to 2,445 $μ$s, a fivefold degradation even though no tenant's own load changed. We introduce Grouper and the scheduling group, a set of isolated runtimes that the allocator treats as one allocation and accounting unit, whose members may hand cores directly to one another. A service sending an RPC donates its core to the peer through an unprivileged kernel fast path, so the core follows the request through the call graph. The allocator retains control through reconciliation, core-addressed revocation and a pooled budget but leaves the critical path; its load falls from $Θ(R \cdot H)$ to $Θ(R)$ in request rate $R$ and hop count $H$. Over a grid of two to ten tenants at 1,000-30,000 requests per second each, Grouper outperforms Caladan (the allocator Junction also builds on) and Linux by up to 7.9$\times$ and 3.4$\times$ at the median and 4.1$\times$ and 14.2$\times$ at the tail, and leaves batch work more throughput than Caladan at over 70% of load points.

cs.OS↗
arXiv2026

SeqMoE: Toward Full-Load Performance via Predictive and Graph-Compatible MoE Offloading

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) creates a structural advantage for offloading: only a small fraction of activated experts need to reside in device memory, and if they can be loaded in time for computation, offloading can in principle approach full-load performance, where all model weights reside in device memory. Yet translating MoE's structural advantage into practical offloading gains remains challenging. We propose SeqMoE to bridge this gap. To maximize expert hits, we build predictive memory management: (i) Sequence-to-sequence prediction. We are the first to recast expert activation prediction as sequence modeling, enabling accurate multi-step, multi-layer forecasts that provide a long and reliable window for downstream decisions. (ii) Joint prefetch scheduling. We formulate prefetch scheduling as Job Sequencing with Deadlines to maximize expected expert hits and improve bandwidth efficiency. (iii) Forecast-driven caching. Leveraging the recursive nature of sequence modeling, we introduce a probabilistic Belady policy for future-aware eviction. To eliminate execution bottleneck, we develop (iv) Graph-compatible offloading runtime. We derive general runtime principles encompassing compute-transparent expert placement and synchronization-free orchestration disciplines for end-to-end graph capture. With 45% expert residency, SeqMoE averages a 96.97% hit rate and 80.22% of full-load performance, advancing the state of the art in MoE offloading.

cs.OS↗
arXiv2026

AKTS: Sub-Microsecond Kernel Policy Switching for Language-Model Agents

GPU-backed LLM servers often multiplex interactive requests with background batch work on the same CPUs. During a request burst, the scheduler should protect time-to-first-token; between bursts, it should let background work make progress. A fixed kernel policy leaves one of these objectives on the table, so agentic OS control needs a way to switch scheduler behavior as the workload changes. The hard part is not deciding that a switch is useful, but applying it safely and fast enough for the kernel. Scheduler events occur every 1-10 $μ$s, and any code that runs there must satisfy the eBPF verifier. Scalar knobs are fast but expose only limited policy behavior, while generating new eBPF policy code is expressive but puts compilation, verification, loading, and possible verifier rejection on the runtime path. We present AKTS, which verifies a policy library once, at load time, and reduces the agent's runtime action to writing an integer index into an in-kernel array of preverified policies. An in-kernel tail call resolves that index. Because the agent emits an index rather than code, verifier failure is not a runtime outcome. On Linux 6.14, AKTS applies a policy switch in 920 ns (p50), matching scalar writes while switching whole policies; makes an invalid index inert across 60,217 invocations on an attached scheduler; and switches policies in a vLLM workload to capture 97% of a throughput policy's batch work while matching a latency policy's burst response.

cs.OS↗