From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: gleb@kernel.org, jfrei@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
borntraeger@de.ibm.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] KVM: don't check for PF_VCPU when yielding
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 14:02:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <547F09D0.7020404@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1416931449-24585-2-git-send-email-dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 25/11/2014 17:04, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> As some architectures (e.g. s390) can't disable preemption while
> entering/leaving the guest, they won't receive the yield in all situations.
>
> kvm_enter_guest() has to be called with preemption_disabled and will set
> PF_VCPU. After that point e.g. s390 reenables preemption and starts to execute the
> guest. The thread might therefore be scheduled out between kvm_enter_guest() and
> kvm_exit_guest(), resulting in PF_VCPU being set but not being run.
>
> Please note that preemption has to stay enabled in order to correctly process
> page faults on s390.
>
> Current code takes PF_VCPU as a hint that the VCPU thread is running and
> therefore needs no yield. yield_to() checks whether the target thread is running,
> so let's use the inbuilt functionality to make it independent of PF_VCPU and
> preemption.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index 5b45330..184f52e 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -1782,10 +1782,6 @@ int kvm_vcpu_yield_to(struct kvm_vcpu *target)
> rcu_read_unlock();
> if (!task)
> return ret;
> - if (task->flags & PF_VCPU) {
> - put_task_struct(task);
> - return ret;
> - }
> ret = yield_to(task, 1);
> put_task_struct(task);
>
>
Applied with a rewritten commit message:
KVM: don't check for PF_VCPU when yielding
kvm_enter_guest() has to be called with preemption disabled and will
set PF_VCPU. Current code takes PF_VCPU as a hint that the VCPU thread
is running and therefore needs no yield.
However, the check on PF_VCPU is wrong on s390, where preemption
has to stay enabled on s390 in order to correctly process page faults.
Thus, s390 reenables preemption and starts to execute the guest.
The thread might be scheduled out between kvm_enter_guest() and
kvm_exit_guest(), resulting in PF_VCPU being set but not being run.
When this happens, the opportunity for directed yield is missed.
However, this check is done already in kvm_vcpu_on_spin before calling
kvm_vcpu_yield_loop:
if (!ACCESS_ONCE(vcpu->preempted))
continue;
so the check on PF_VCPU is superfluous in general, and this patch
removes it.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-03 13:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-25 16:04 [PATCH RFC 0/2] assign each vcpu an owning thread and improve yielding David Hildenbrand
2014-11-25 16:04 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] KVM: don't check for PF_VCPU when yielding David Hildenbrand
2014-11-26 7:51 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-11-26 9:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-11-26 9:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-11-28 10:08 ` Raghavendra KT
2014-11-28 10:58 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-11-28 11:40 ` Raghavendra K T
2014-12-01 9:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-12-03 12:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-03 13:02 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2014-12-03 13:04 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-11-25 16:04 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] KVM: thread creating a vcpu is the owner of that vcpu David Hildenbrand
2014-11-26 7:54 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-03 12:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-03 12:12 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] assign each vcpu an owning thread and improve yielding David Hildenbrand
2014-12-03 12:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-03 13:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-12-03 13:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-03 13:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=547F09D0.7020404@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=jfrei@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.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.