All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David S. Ahern" <daahern@cisco.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Moving the kvm ioapic, pic, and pit back to userspace
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:31:54 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0D1EFA.70104@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C0D0FB7.80709@redhat.com>



On 06/07/10 09:26, Avi Kivity wrote:

> The original motivation for moving the PIC and IOAPIC into the kernel
> was performance, especially for assigned devices.  Both devices are high
> interaction since they deal with interrupts; practically after every
> interrupt there is either a PIC ioport write, or an APIC bus message,
> both signalling an EOI operation.  Moving the PIT into the kernel
> allowed us to catch up with missed timer interrupt injections, and
> speeded up guests which read the PIT counters (e.g. tickless guests).
> 
> However, modern guests running on modern qemu use MSI extensively; both
> virtio and assigned devices now have MSI support; and the planned VFIO
> only supports kernel delivery via MSI anyway; line based interrupts will
> need to be mediated by userspace.

The "modern" guest comment is a bit concerning. 2.4 kernels (e.g.,
RHEL3) use the PIT for timekeeping and will still be around for a while.
RHEL4 and RHEL5 will be around for a long time to come. Not sure how
those fit within the "modern" label, though I see my RHEL4 guest is
using the pit as a timesource.

David

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "David S. Ahern" <daahern@cisco.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC] Moving the kvm ioapic, pic, and pit back to userspace
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:31:54 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0D1EFA.70104@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C0D0FB7.80709@redhat.com>



On 06/07/10 09:26, Avi Kivity wrote:

> The original motivation for moving the PIC and IOAPIC into the kernel
> was performance, especially for assigned devices.  Both devices are high
> interaction since they deal with interrupts; practically after every
> interrupt there is either a PIC ioport write, or an APIC bus message,
> both signalling an EOI operation.  Moving the PIT into the kernel
> allowed us to catch up with missed timer interrupt injections, and
> speeded up guests which read the PIT counters (e.g. tickless guests).
> 
> However, modern guests running on modern qemu use MSI extensively; both
> virtio and assigned devices now have MSI support; and the planned VFIO
> only supports kernel delivery via MSI anyway; line based interrupts will
> need to be mediated by userspace.

The "modern" guest comment is a bit concerning. 2.4 kernels (e.g.,
RHEL3) use the PIT for timekeeping and will still be around for a while.
RHEL4 and RHEL5 will be around for a long time to come. Not sure how
those fit within the "modern" label, though I see my RHEL4 guest is
using the pit as a timesource.

David

  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-07 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-07 15:26 [RFC] Moving the kvm ioapic, pic, and pit back to userspace Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 15:26 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 16:31 ` David S. Ahern [this message]
2010-06-07 16:31   ` [Qemu-devel] " David S. Ahern
2010-06-07 18:46   ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 18:46     ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 18:54     ` David S. Ahern
2010-06-07 18:54       ` [Qemu-devel] " David S. Ahern
2010-06-07 19:16       ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 19:16         ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 17:04 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-07 17:04   ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-06-07 18:42   ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 18:42     ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-07 22:23     ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-07 22:23       ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-06-08  5:48       ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-08  5:48         ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-09 15:59 ` Dong, Eddie
2010-06-09 15:59   ` [Qemu-devel] " Dong, Eddie
2010-06-09 16:05   ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-09 16:05     ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-10  2:37     ` Dong, Eddie
2010-06-10  2:37       ` [Qemu-devel] " Dong, Eddie
2010-06-10  2:59       ` Avi Kivity
2010-06-10  2:59         ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-06-10 14:42         ` Dong, Eddie
2010-06-10 14:42           ` [Qemu-devel] " Dong, Eddie

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=4C0D1EFA.70104@cisco.com \
    --to=daahern@cisco.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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.