All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	zhiyuan.lv@intel.com, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/ioreq server: Optimize p2m cleaning up code in p2m_finish_type_change().
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 00:28:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58E51B46.10107@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d116437-f159-acb1-8be7-11150771efbd@citrix.com>



On 4/5/2017 11:11 PM, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 05/04/17 16:10, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 05/04/17 09:59, Yu Zhang wrote:
>>> Previously, p2m_finish_type_change() is triggered to iterate and
>>> clean up the p2m table when an ioreq server unmaps from memory type
>>> HVMMEM_ioreq_server. And the current iteration number is set to 256
>>> And after these iterations, hypercall pre-emption is checked.
>>>
>>> But it is likely that no p2m change is performed for the just finished
>>> iterations, which means p2m_finish_type_change() will return quite
>>> soon. So in such scenario, we can allow the p2m iteration to continue,
>>> without checking the hypercall pre-emption.
>> Suppose you have a guest with 128TiB of RAM, and the ioreq_server p2m
>> entries are at the very end of RAM.  Won't this run for several minutes
>> before even allowing preemption?
> Sorry, this should be GiB.  But I think you get my point. :-)

Yep. I got it.
I'd better reconsider it - my head is quite dizzy now. Maybe together 
with your generic p2m change solution in 4.10. :-)

Thanks
Yu
>
>   -George
>
>


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-05 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-05  8:59 [PATCH RFC] x86/ioreq server: Optimize p2m cleaning up code in p2m_finish_type_change() Yu Zhang
2017-04-05 15:10 ` George Dunlap
2017-04-05 15:11   ` George Dunlap
2017-04-05 16:28     ` Yu Zhang [this message]
2017-05-09 16:29 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-10  5:27   ` Yu Zhang
2017-05-09 16:30 ` Jan Beulich

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=58E51B46.10107@linux.intel.com \
    --to=yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
    --cc=zhiyuan.lv@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.