From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Yang Zhang" <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com>,
"feng wu" <feng.wu@intel.com>,
mst@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: x86: avoid atomic operations on APICv vmentry
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 03:47:45 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <119879133.3749907.1476517665517.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9B7F4808-2294-426D-B463-CEB188CED2E0@gmail.com>
> > On Oct 14, 2016, at 11:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> for (i = 0; i <= 7; i++) {
> >>> - pir_val = xchg(&pir[i], 0);
> >>> - if (pir_val)
> >>> + pir_val = READ_ONCE(pir[i]);
> >>
> >> Out of curiosity, do you really need this READ_ONCE?
> >
> > The answer can only be "depends on the compiler's whims". :)
> > If you think of READ_ONCE as a C11 relaxed atomic load, then yes.
>
> Hm.. So the idea is to make the code "race-free” in the sense
> that every concurrent memory access is done using READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE?
>
> If that is the case, I think there are many other cases that need to be
> changed, for example apic->irr_pending and vcpu->arch.pv.pv_unhalted.
There is no documentation for this in the kernel tree unfortunately.
But yes, I think we should do that. Using READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE around
memory barriers is a start.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-15 7:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-14 18:21 [PATCH 0/5] KVM: x86: cleanup and minimal speedup for APICv Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-14 18:21 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: x86: avoid atomic operations on APICv vmentry Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-14 18:50 ` Nadav Amit
2016-10-14 18:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-14 19:44 ` Nadav Amit
2016-10-15 7:47 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2016-10-16 2:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-19 11:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-10-26 21:50 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-16 3:21 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-17 11:07 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-26 19:53 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-26 21:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-27 16:44 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-27 16:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-27 17:06 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-28 9:39 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-28 22:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-10-14 18:21 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: x86: do not scan IRR twice " Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-18 6:04 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-10-26 19:59 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-11-03 13:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-11-03 13:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-11-03 16:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-11-03 15:03 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-11-03 16:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-11-03 18:07 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-11-03 18:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-11-03 18:29 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-11-03 20:16 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-11-04 9:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-14 18:21 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: x86: do not use KVM_REQ_EVENT for APICv interrupt injection Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-26 20:05 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-14 18:21 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: x86: remove unnecessary sync_pir_to_irr Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-26 20:28 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-14 18:21 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: vmx: clear pending interrupts on KVM_SET_LAPIC Paolo Bonzini
2016-10-26 20:08 ` Radim Krčmář
2016-10-26 21:52 ` [PATCH 0/5] KVM: x86: cleanup and minimal speedup for APICv Michael S. Tsirkin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=119879133.3749907.1476517665517.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=feng.wu@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.