From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com>, Xin Li <xin.li@intel.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on nativeidentified
Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:45:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A0C58BB.3090303@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A0BED040200007800000DB0@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Jan Beulich wrote:
> Wouldn't a third solution be to use ticket spinlocks everywhere, i.e. eliminate
> the current indirection, and replace it by an indirection for just the contention
> case? As I view it, the problem for Xen aren't really the ticket locks by
> themselves, but rather the extra spinning involved, which is of concern only
> if a lock is contended. We're using ticket locks quite happily in our kernels,
> with directed instead of global wakeup from the unlock path.
Do you have a patch to illustrate what you mean? How do you keep track
of the target vcpu for the directed wakeup? Are you using the
event-poll mechanism to block?
J
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Xin Li <xin.li@intel.com>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on nativeidentified
Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:45:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A0C58BB.3090303@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A0BED040200007800000DB0@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Jan Beulich wrote:
> Wouldn't a third solution be to use ticket spinlocks everywhere, i.e. eliminate
> the current indirection, and replace it by an indirection for just the contention
> case? As I view it, the problem for Xen aren't really the ticket locks by
> themselves, but rather the extra spinning involved, which is of concern only
> if a lock is contended. We're using ticket locks quite happily in our kernels,
> with directed instead of global wakeup from the unlock path.
Do you have a patch to illustrate what you mean? How do you keep track
of the target vcpu for the directed wakeup? Are you using the
event-poll mechanism to block?
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-14 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-14 0:16 Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native identified Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-14 0:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-14 1:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 1:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 8:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-14 8:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-14 14:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 14:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 17:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-14 17:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-14 17:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 17:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 8:05 ` [Xen-devel] Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on nativeidentified Jan Beulich
2009-05-14 8:05 ` Jan Beulich
2009-05-14 8:33 ` [Xen-devel] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-14 17:45 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2009-05-14 17:45 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-15 8:10 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2009-05-15 18:50 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-18 7:19 ` Jan Beulich
2009-05-18 7:19 ` Jan Beulich
2009-05-20 22:42 ` [Xen-devel] " Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-20 22:42 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-15 18:18 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: Fix performance regression caused by paravirt_ops on native kernels tip-bot for Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-15 18:18 ` tip-bot for Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-21 22:42 ` Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native identified Chuck Ebbert
2009-05-21 22:48 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-21 22:48 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-21 23:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-21 23:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 1:26 ` Xin, Xiaohui
2009-05-22 1:26 ` Xin, Xiaohui
2009-05-22 3:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 3:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 4:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-22 4:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-22 5:59 ` Xin, Xiaohui
2009-05-22 5:59 ` Xin, Xiaohui
2009-05-22 16:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 16:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 22:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-22 22:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-22 22:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-22 22:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-25 9:15 ` [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native kernels Ingo Molnar
2009-05-26 18:42 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-28 6:17 ` Nick Piggin
2009-05-28 20:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-05-30 10:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-02 14:18 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-02 14:49 ` Ulrich Drepper
2009-06-02 15:03 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-02 15:22 ` Ulrich Drepper
2009-06-02 16:20 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-02 18:13 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-06-02 18:06 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-06-02 18:27 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-03 6:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-02 19:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-02 19:51 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-03 12:38 ` Rusty Russell
2009-06-03 16:09 ` Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <200906041554.37102.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
2009-06-04 15:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-04 21:52 ` Dave McCracken
2009-06-05 7:31 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2009-06-05 14:31 ` Rusty Russell
2009-06-06 18:54 ` Anders K. Pedersen
2009-06-05 4:46 ` Rusty Russell
2009-06-05 14:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-07 0:53 ` Rusty Russell
2009-06-08 14:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 9:39 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 11:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-09 12:10 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 12:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-09 12:42 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 12:56 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-09 15:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 23:33 ` Paul Mackerras
2009-06-10 1:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-09 15:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 15:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-06-09 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 18:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 22:48 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-06-09 22:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-06-09 14:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 14:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-09 15:55 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-09 15:38 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 16:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 16:21 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 16:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-09 16:45 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-09 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-10 5:53 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-17 9:40 ` Pavel Machek
2009-06-17 9:56 ` Nick Piggin
2009-06-10 6:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=4A0C58BB.3090303@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=xiaohui.xin@intel.com \
--cc=xin.li@intel.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.