From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
Cc: kvm-devel <kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Consolidate kvm_eat_signals
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 09:31:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <482854D2.50100@codemonkey.ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48283071.5030600@qumranet.com>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>>> Given that with the iothread we spend very little time processing
>>> signals in vcpu threads, maybe it's better to drop the loop completely.
>>> The common case is zero or one pending signals. The uncommon case of
>>> two or more pending signals will be handled by the KVM_RUN ioctl
>>> returning immediately with -EINTR (i.e. in the outer loop).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> You mean
>>
>> static void kvm_main_loop_wait(CPUState *env, int timeout)
>> {
>> pthread_mutex_unlock(&qemu_mutex);
>> kvm_eat_signal(env, timeout);
>> pthread_mutex_lock(&qemu_mutex);
>> cpu_single_env = env;
>>
>> vcpu_info[env->cpu_index].signalled = 0;
>> }
>>
>> ?
>>
>>
>
> Yes. The loop was a (perhaps premature) optimization that is now
> totally unnecessary, unless I'm missing something quite large.
>
It used to be that kvm_eat_signal() selected after consuming as many
signals as possible while only sleeping once. That's why there's a
combination of sleeping and polling.
Now the VCPU threads never select so the whole loop can be simplified to
a single sigtimedwait() that always blocks.
In reality, I don't think sigtimedwait() is really needed/useful for
VCPUs anymore. We only use it to catch SIG_IPI and we only use SIG_IPI
to break out of sleeping. I don't see any reason why we couldn't switch
over to using a file descriptor for notification (or a pthread
condition). In the very least, we could just select() on nothing and
allow SIG_IPI to break us out of the select.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> Oh. There used to be a bug where we didn't check for a pending signal
> before the first guest entry, so this would add a lot of latency
> (effectively making the bug window much larger). That was only closed
> in 2.6.24 (by 7e66f350).
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-12 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-12 10:50 [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Consolidate kvm_eat_signals Jan Kiszka
2008-05-12 11:33 ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 11:42 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-05-12 11:56 ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 14:31 ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
2008-05-12 14:42 ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 15:11 ` Anthony Liguori
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=482854D2.50100@codemonkey.ws \
--to=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=avi@qumranet.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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.