From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Jennifer Herbert <jennifer.herbert@citrix.com>,
Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 8/8] x86: reduce struct hvm_domain size
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 14:17:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5550ABF4.5040904@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <554CA26E02000078000781E6@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 08/05/15 10:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 30.04.15 at 17:33, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Pack struct hvm_domain to reduce it by 8 bytes. Thus reducing the
>> size of struct domain by 8 bytes.
>
> Is that really true _after_ the change to ticket locks?
Yes.
>> @@ -137,6 +131,12 @@ struct hvm_domain {
>> bool_t is_s3_suspended;
>> bool_t introspection_enabled;
>>
>> + /* If one of vcpus of this domain is in no_fill_mode or
>> + * mtrr/pat between vcpus is not the same, set is_in_uc_mode
>> + */
>> + bool_t is_in_uc_mode;
>> + spinlock_t uc_lock;
>> +
>> /*
>> * TSC value that VCPUs use to calculate their tsc_offset value.
>> * Used during initialization and save/restore.
>
> And here it follows 5 bool_t-s, and is being followed by an 8-byte
> aligned field. I.e. without ticket locks it exactly fills the 3 byte gap,
> but with ticket locks it requires a second 8-byte slot.
No. The old byte locks were 4-bytes in size (not 2 bytes).
> Additionally I wonder whether the reduced distance between
> uc_lock and msixtbl_list_lock would now lead to (or, going forward,
> at least risk) them being on the same cache line.
They're still on different cache lines.
David
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-11 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-30 15:33 [PATCHv4 0/8] Use ticket locks for spinlocks David Vrabel
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 1/8] x86: provide arch_fetch_and_add() David Vrabel
2015-05-07 15:59 ` Jan Beulich
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 2/8] arm: " David Vrabel
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 3/8] x86: provide add_sized() David Vrabel
2015-05-07 16:05 ` Jan Beulich
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 4/8] arm: " David Vrabel
2015-05-05 13:49 ` Ian Campbell
2015-05-05 13:54 ` Tim Deegan
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 5/8] xen: use ticket locks for spin locks David Vrabel
2015-05-05 13:56 ` Ian Campbell
2015-05-05 13:58 ` David Vrabel
2015-05-08 9:36 ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-11 13:13 ` David Vrabel
2015-05-11 13:29 ` Tim Deegan
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 6/8] x86, arm: remove asm/spinlock.h from all architectures David Vrabel
2015-05-05 13:49 ` Ian Campbell
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 7/8] x86: reduce struct paging_domain size David Vrabel
2015-04-30 15:33 ` [PATCHv4 8/8] x86: reduce struct hvm_domain size David Vrabel
2015-05-08 9:47 ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-11 13:17 ` David Vrabel [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=5550ABF4.5040904@citrix.com \
--to=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=jennifer.herbert@citrix.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.