All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mario Smarduch <m.smarduch@samsung.com>
To: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Cc: marc.zyngier@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM/arm64: enable enhanced armv8 fp/simd lazy switch
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 15:04:23 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5647BDF7.5070209@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151110111822.GC12968@cbox>



On 11/10/2015 3:18 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 03:13:15PM -0800, Mario Smarduch wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/5/2015 7:02 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 02:56:33PM -0700, Mario Smarduch wrote:
[....]
>> kern_hyp_va x0
>> add x2, x0, #VCPU_CONTEXT
>> mrs x1, fpexec32_el2
>> str x1, [x2, #CPU_SYSREG_OFFSET(FPEXC32_EL2)]
>> ret
>>
>> Of course each hyp call has additional overhead, at a high exit to
>> vcpu_put ratio hyp call appears better. But all this is very
>> highly dependent on exit rate and fp/simd usage. IMO hyp call
>> works better under extreme loads should be pretty close
>> for general loads.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
> I think the typical case will be lots of exits and few
> vcpu_load/vcpu_put, and I think it's reasonable to write the code that
> way.

Yes, especially for RT guests where vCPU is pinned.

Thanks.
> 
> That should also be much better for VHE.
> 
> So I would go that direction.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Christoffer
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: m.smarduch@samsung.com (Mario Smarduch)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] KVM/arm64: enable enhanced armv8 fp/simd lazy switch
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 15:04:23 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5647BDF7.5070209@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151110111822.GC12968@cbox>



On 11/10/2015 3:18 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 03:13:15PM -0800, Mario Smarduch wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/5/2015 7:02 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 02:56:33PM -0700, Mario Smarduch wrote:
[....]
>> kern_hyp_va x0
>> add x2, x0, #VCPU_CONTEXT
>> mrs x1, fpexec32_el2
>> str x1, [x2, #CPU_SYSREG_OFFSET(FPEXC32_EL2)]
>> ret
>>
>> Of course each hyp call has additional overhead, at a high exit to
>> vcpu_put ratio hyp call appears better. But all this is very
>> highly dependent on exit rate and fp/simd usage. IMO hyp call
>> works better under extreme loads should be pretty close
>> for general loads.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
> I think the typical case will be lots of exits and few
> vcpu_load/vcpu_put, and I think it's reasonable to write the code that
> way.

Yes, especially for RT guests where vCPU is pinned.

Thanks.
> 
> That should also be much better for VHE.
> 
> So I would go that direction.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Christoffer
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-14 23:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-30 21:56 [PATCH v3 0/3] KVM/arm64/arm: enhance armv7/8 fp/simd lazy switch Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56 ` Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] KVM/arm: add hooks for armv7 fp/simd lazy switch support Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56   ` Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] KVM/arm/arm64: enable enhanced armv7 fp/simd lazy switch Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56   ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-05 14:48   ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-05 14:48     ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06  0:23     ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06  0:23       ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06 11:37       ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06 11:37         ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06 16:16         ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06 16:16           ` Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM/arm64: enable enhanced armv8 " Mario Smarduch
2015-10-30 21:56   ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-05 15:02   ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-05 15:02     ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06  0:57     ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06  0:57       ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06 11:29       ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06 11:29         ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-06 16:10         ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-06 16:10           ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-09 23:13     ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-09 23:13       ` Mario Smarduch
2015-11-10 11:18       ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-10 11:18         ` Christoffer Dall
2015-11-14 23:04         ` Mario Smarduch [this message]
2015-11-14 23:04           ` Mario Smarduch

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=5647BDF7.5070209@samsung.com \
    --to=m.smarduch@samsung.com \
    --cc=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.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.