From: drjones@redhat.com (Andrew Jones)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: KVM: Increase max VCPUs per-Guest to 8
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:36:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130914123656.GD2596@hawk.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a4061dc01decc669fcdfaffeb2b2ed1@www.loen.fr>
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:13:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2013-09-14 12:58, Andrew Jones wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:46:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>On 11/09/13 14:02, Anup Patel wrote:
> >>> Current max VCPUs per-Guest is set to 4 which is preventing
> >>> us from creating a Guest (or VM) with 8 VCPUs on Host (e.g.
> >>> X-Gene Storm SOC) with 8 Host CPUs.
> >>>
> >>> The correct value of max VCPUs per-Guest should be same as
> >>> the max CPUs supported by GICv2 which is 8 hence this patch
> >>> increases KVM_MAX_VCPUS to 8.
> >>
> >>If anything, please make it configurable just like we have on
> >>32bit. No
> >>reason to impose the extra overhead on everyone.
> >
> >What type of overhead are we talking about? Memory, right? as
>
> Memory indeed.
>
> >kvm_for_each_vcpu is almost always used when iterating. But Anup
> >says in
> >his v2 of this patch "can make things slower". If it's memory,
> >then is so
> >much consumed by each vcpu that we shouldn't always set KVM_MAX_VCPUS
>
> Not only. See how the GIC emulation also has per-VCPU data, and this
> results in potentially huge data structures. I have plans to address
> this in the future though.
>
> >to at least the highest number that current hardware supports?
> >Particularly
> >for aarch64 I think we should always be considering multi-platform
> >with the
> >kernel configs.
>
> What do you mean by multiplatform? This constant has nothing to do
> with being multiplatform, and the initial commit message was quite
> misleading in this respect. You can perfectly have 8 VCPUs on a
> single CPU host, and nothing so far impacts multiplatform.
I meant compile the kernel once, but still have it useful on multiple
hosts (some with 4 cpus, some with 8...). Of course with config option
that's still possible, just compile with CONFIG_KVM_MAX_VCPUS=8. So I
guess this is really more of a debate about what the default should be.
Considering the GIC code may be a bit of an over-consumer at the moment
and 8-cpu hosts may not be that widely deployed, then maybe 4 is the
better default right now?
drew
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-14 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-11 13:02 [PATCH] arm64: KVM: Increase max VCPUs per-Guest to 8 Anup Patel
2013-09-13 12:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-09-14 8:51 ` Andrew Jones
2013-09-14 11:58 ` Andrew Jones
2013-09-14 12:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-09-14 12:36 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
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=20130914123656.GD2596@hawk.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.